Subject: [MMUSIC] RTSP: dest_addr in the response

From: Magnus Westerlund <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 30 Oct 2008 16:26:11 +0100

Hi,

I found a open issue in the RTSP 2.0 draft. Currently you are allowed to
specify an address less dest_addr header only containing ports. The
server is expected to use the RTSP TCP connection source address as
destination. To enable the client to see what address is used I think it
is very reasonable that the server returns the header with the address
it is using. Thus I propose the following text to be added to Section
16.51 under the dest_addr parameter in the last paragraph:

Responses to request including the Transport header with a dest_addr
parameter SHALL include the full destination address that is actually
used by the server.

Comments?

Magnus Westerlund

IETF Transport Area Director & TSVWG Chair
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Multimedia Technologies, Ericsson Research EAB/TVM
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Ericsson AB                | Phone +46 8 4048287
Färögatan 6                | Fax   +46 8 7575550
S-164 80 Stockholm, Sweden | mailto: [email-masked]
----------------------------------------------------------------------
_______________________________________________
mmusic mailing list
[email-masked]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mmusic

---

From: "Rémi Denis-Courmont" <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 31 Oct 2008 09:27:31 +0200

> parameter SHALL include the full destination address that is actually

I don't really care. I think this informations is of no use to the client 
anyway.

-- 
Rémi Denis-Courmont
Maemo Software, Nokia Devices R&D
_______________________________________________
mmusic mailing list
[email-masked]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mmusic

---

From: "HAAS Christian" <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 31 Oct 2008 08:51:44 +0100

Hello;

From: Behalf Of Rémi Denis-Courmont
> I don't really care. I think this informations is of no use to the
> client anyway.

I also see this of little use for the client -- at most it could verify that
the IP is actually his own.
But I'd suggest it to be good practice (SHOULD) to return the full address
for debugging/tracing.

Regards,
ch
____________________________________________________
Christian Haas
Team DIVOS, Software Engineer
FREQUENTIS AG

Innovationsstraße 1, 1100 Vienna, Austria
Phone   +43-1-811 50 - 8353
Mobile   +43-664-60 850 - 8353
Fax       +43-1-811 50 - 77 8353
Web      www.frequentis.com
E-Mail    [email-masked]
 
Handelsgericht Wien (Vienna Commercial Court): FN 72115 b
DVR 0364797, ATU 14715600
____________________________________________________
Diese E-Mail könnte vertrauliche und/oder rechtlich geschützte Informationen
enthalten. Wenn Sie nicht der richtige Adressat sind oder diese E-Mail
irrtümlich erhalten haben, informieren Sie bitte sofort den Absender und
vernichten Sie diese E-Mail. Das unerlaubte Kopieren sowie die unbefugte
Weitergabe dieser E-Mail sind nicht gestattet.
This e-mail may contain confidential and/or privileged information. If you
are not the intended recipient (or have received this e-mail in error) please
notify the sender immediately and destroy this e-mail. Any unauthorised
copying, disclosure or distribution of the material in this e-mail is
strictly forbidden.

---

From: Magnus Westerlund <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 31 Oct 2008 11:00:28 +0100

> But I'd suggest it to be good practice (SHOULD) to return the full address

Okay, I was thinking for the same purpose of debugging and verifying
that the server see something that you think are correct. I don't see
any security risks here thus I was thinking of forcing this with a SHALL
for more usability. But I can write a SHOULD also.

Cheers

Magnus Westerlund