Subject: RE: [midcom] 2x allocate vs FANTOM

From: Steve Davies <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 26 Nov 2001 22:22:05 -0000

Comments also inline...

-----Original Message-----
From: Rohan Mahy [mailto:[email-masked]]
Sent: 26 November 2001 18:02
To: [email-masked]
Cc: [email-masked]; [email-masked]
Subject: [midcom] 2x allocate vs FANTOM

Pete Cordell wrote:

[snip]

 >> If you use TURN to allocate two ports in one message, you need a way to
 >> associate the second port with the original allocation message.  In
FANTOM
 >> we do this by returning an identifier in the equivalent of the allocate
 >> response.  We then include that identifier in a probe (equivalent to the
 >> STUN request in Bob's suggestion) sent to the server.  This allows the
 >> server to do the association.
 >>
 >> With this method, the second port is effectively being set up using
 >> out-of-band signalling.

To which Rohan Mahy replied:

>This is incorrect.  A second TURN request would still send traffic from and

>receive traffic on the same port it uses for an Allocate 
>Request/Response.  You would just include an extra identifier in-band.

This sounds remarkably like a FANTOM Probe packet! 

Steve

_______________________________________________
midcom mailing list
[email-masked]
http://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/midcom