Subject: [BEHAVE] Re: removing application milestone

From: Pyda Srisuresh <[email-masked]>
Date: Sat, 7 Jul 2007 17:29:39 -0700 (PDT)

Dear all,

I believe, it is WRONG to drop this milestone from the WG. There is no
technical justification that I can see. Application behave milestone, along
with NAT behave milestones(TCP, UDP etc) forms key foundation to the formation
of this WG. Doing NAT milestones and not the application milestone makes the WG
work incomplete, IMHO. If you care about applications traversing NATs, here is
my appeal to you - Please voice your opinion on this list if you think it WRONG
to drop application behave milestone from the WG charter.

I reviewed the audio from the last WG meeting and read the minutes - I believe,
the discussion was off-track from the get-go and did not have a counter balance
to the "Why do we want to say how to design ICE when ICE already exists" line
of argument. The milestone or the draft(ford-behave-app) is not about how to
design ICE; The milestone and the draft is about how to design applications (in
general) to work with nodes behind NATs; ICE is one example of a protocol that
successfully adapted the recommendationds for a class of applications. ICE does
not obviate the milestone or the draft; but rather reinforces them, IMHO. The
behave milestone has been around for more than 2 years; so has the
ford-behave-appl draft been. The milestone and the draft have been created
independently of ICE. Embracing of ICE should be a testament to the goodness of
the recommendations in the draft, not grounds for removing the draft or the
milestone.

Now, I do recognize, one BIG problem has been that none of the authors of
ford-behave-app draft had been available to present the draft in any of the
IETF meetings.  This certainly had hurt the draft in the last IETF meeting.
Both Dan and I made attempts in the past to bring in a new co-author. But, no
avail. I am open to anyone who would be interested in co-authoring and
presenting the draft in IETF meetings.

Lastly, I want to enphasise, this is about dropping the milestone first;
Dropping the ford-behave-app draft is only next. I was told ford-behave-app
draft can indepednently move forward as an individual submission. When the
draft is deemed useful to move forward, I dont understand why the milestone had
to be removed.

Well, I said my 2c. Thank you for your time.

regards,
suresh

--- Dan Wing <[email-masked]> wrote:

> At the BEHAVE meeting in Prague there was strong consensus to remove the
> milestone:
>       "Submit informational that discusses current NAT 
>        traversal techniques used by applications"
> from our charter, and to not adopt draft-ford-behave-app to meet that
> milestone.
> 
> If the mailing list doesn't have a substantial disagreement with the
> consensus from the Prague meeting, I will remove that milestone from our
> charter.
> 
> 
> 
> Also during the meeting there were some ideas around adding a new milestone
> for a document which might discuss when an application might choose UNSAF
> (STUN), Bonjour/UPnP, or other NAT traversal techniques.  If a candidate
> document emerges we can consider creating such a milestone.
> 
> -d
> 
> 

_______________________________________________
Behave mailing list
[email-masked]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/behave