From ron.even.tlv@gmail.com Sun Sep 6 05:37:34 2009 Return-Path: X-Original-To: xcon@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: xcon@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A26113A69A6 for ; Sun, 6 Sep 2009 05:37:34 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: 0.002 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.002 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_50=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 6uAE-c+bjw4k for ; Sun, 6 Sep 2009 05:37:34 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-fx0-f217.google.com (mail-fx0-f217.google.com [209.85.220.217]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 46D4728C100 for ; Sun, 6 Sep 2009 05:37:33 -0700 (PDT) Received: by fxm17 with SMTP id 17so1505855fxm.37 for ; Sun, 06 Sep 2009 05:37:55 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:from:to:subject:date :message-id:mime-version:content-type:x-mailer:thread-index :content-language; bh=8JX8UbnU8pBeigc6oG6mY974PKH4S+1xGoSZHyHIAqA=; b=omIAkaAnVbeDnIhKFEAQF2vu51fHvJTuxwmRjh8TxoB/41UsqTZ9ZSLiTOBFG3QcBu o/jhZC0qgWOYxOrqmE16g8dSUyyBDmIbSss+KcBLbGKhpqrAvOZNaHvu0wnEmTTgt5ro +lKRiCLHbA+BpyX2x6nos8OHaIDgvsNvet6B0= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=from:to:subject:date:message-id:mime-version:content-type:x-mailer :thread-index:content-language; b=pGjhvwcoEEqvMFFDIjXT04nEUXIgZDp0Aa8JaIqKN3I8sPoGNqSsS9UhmlrjPqZlDF Q7UNDO+g6/0FUpWSZDhoGd/3gCXNnFbT25m0XyZ23tuERiBMHDJVps6XiPq6zhBSXI86 y9F0AUvWtZ09k1eEl3UW39T9zkA7+uN2IYW7I= Received: by 10.86.228.3 with SMTP id a3mr6977414fgh.51.1252240675364; Sun, 06 Sep 2009 05:37:55 -0700 (PDT) Received: from windows8d787f9 (bzq-79-178-113-53.red.bezeqint.net [79.178.113.53]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id l19sm6354486fgb.11.2009.09.06.05.37.54 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=RC4-MD5); Sun, 06 Sep 2009 05:37:55 -0700 (PDT) From: "Roni Even" To: Date: Sun, 6 Sep 2009 15:36:42 +0300 Message-ID: <4aa3ad23.1358560a.7df0.0213@mx.google.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_38D4_01CA2F07.D6E3A480" X-Mailer: Microsoft Office Outlook 12.0 thread-index: Acou7q/yQuzr4sJsSJ6N6rWenQjbFA== Content-Language: en-us Subject: [XCON] BFCP over UDP X-BeenThere: xcon@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: Centralized Conferencing List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 06 Sep 2009 12:37:34 -0000 This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_38D4_01CA2F07.D6E3A480 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Hi, I reviewed the individual draft draft-sandbakken-xcon-bfcp-udp-00 which have expired. I find that this proposal important in order to work in environments where TCP will fail because of FW/NWT traversal issues and would like to see an update to the draft that will address the security issue probably using DTLS. The draft should also address the issue of fragmentation. The use case is for supporting token based presentation and the assumption is that the information will be small so the fragmentation will be less critical. Roni Even ------=_NextPart_000_38D4_01CA2F07.D6E3A480 Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Hi,

I reviewed the individual draft = draft-sandbakken-xcon-bfcp-udp-00 which have expired. I find that this proposal important  in order = to work in environments where TCP will fail because of FW/NWT traversal issues and would like to = see an update to the draft that will address the security issue probably using = DTLS. The draft should also address the issue of fragmentation. =

The use case is for supporting token based = presentation and the assumption is that the information will be small so the = fragmentation will be less critical.

 

 

Roni Even

------=_NextPart_000_38D4_01CA2F07.D6E3A480-- From lorenzo@meetecho.com Wed Sep 9 02:33:10 2009 Return-Path: X-Original-To: xcon@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: xcon@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 320163A6872 for ; Wed, 9 Sep 2009 02:33:10 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: 0.288 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.288 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=1.007, BAYES_00=-2.599, HELO_EQ_IT=0.635, HOST_EQ_IT=1.245] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 362LM5qJMJ1f for ; Wed, 9 Sep 2009 02:33:09 -0700 (PDT) Received: from smtp5.aruba.it (smtpd2.aruba.it [62.149.128.207]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with SMTP id F03CE3A6868 for ; Wed, 9 Sep 2009 02:33:08 -0700 (PDT) Received: (qmail 18727 invoked by uid 89); 9 Sep 2009 09:33:35 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO lminiero-acer) (lorenzo@meetecho.com@143.225.229.172) by smtp5.aruba.it with SMTP; 9 Sep 2009 09:33:35 -0000 Date: Wed, 9 Sep 2009 11:33:21 +0200 From: Lorenzo Miniero To: "Roni Even" Message-Id: <20090909113321.4289942c.lorenzo@meetecho.com> In-Reply-To: <4aa3ad23.1358560a.7df0.0213@mx.google.com> References: <4aa3ad23.1358560a.7df0.0213@mx.google.com> Organization: Meetecho X-Mailer: Sylpheed 2.6.0 (GTK+ 2.16.5; i586-redhat-linux-gnu) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Spam-Rating: smtp5.aruba.it 1.6.2 0/1000/N Cc: xcon@ietf.org Subject: Re: [XCON] BFCP over UDP X-BeenThere: xcon@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: Centralized Conferencing List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 09 Sep 2009 09:33:10 -0000 Hi Roni, I also think this would be a very useful solution to have, and would support a new document addressing the UDP case. For what concerns fragmentation, however, this is probably an orthogonal issue, since in my opinion it may affect the BFCP/TCP as well. When working on the implementation of the protocol, in fact, we noticed how large BFCP messages could easily become, and so I raised this issue on the ML: http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/xcon/current/msg01920.html but it didn't seem to gather much interest at the time. Anyway, if anyone is interested in working on this in the future (be it as part of a potential new BFCP/UDP document or somewhere else), I'd be glad to cooperate. Lorenzo On Sun, 6 Sep 2009 15:36:42 +0300 "Roni Even" wrote: > Hi, > > I reviewed the individual draft draft-sandbakken-xcon-bfcp-udp-00 which have > expired. I find that this proposal important in order to work in > environments where TCP will fail because of FW/NWT traversal issues and > would like to see an update to the draft that will address the security > issue probably using DTLS. The draft should also address the issue of > fragmentation. > > The use case is for supporting token based presentation and the assumption > is that the information will be small so the fragmentation will be less > critical. > > > > > > Roni Even > > -- Lorenzo Miniero