Subject: [MMUSIC] I-D Action:draft-ietf-mmusic-ice-tcp-08.txt

From: [email-masked]
Date: Tue, 13 Oct 2009 17:45:01 -0700 (PDT)

A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts directories.
This draft is a work item of the Multiparty Multimedia Session Control Working Group of the IETF.

	Title           : TCP Candidates with Interactive Connectivity Establishment (ICE)
	Author(s)       : S. Perreault, J. Rosenberg
	Filename        : draft-ietf-mmusic-ice-tcp-08.txt
	Pages           : 19
	Date            : 2009-10-13

Interactive Connectivity Establishment (ICE) defines a mechanism for
NAT traversal for multimedia communication protocols based on the
offer/answer model of session negotiation.  ICE works by providing a
set of candidate transport addresses for each media stream, which are
then validated with peer-to-peer connectivity checks based on Session
Traversal Utilities for NAT (STUN).  ICE provides a general framework
for describing candidates, but only defines UDP-based transport
protocols.  This specification extends ICE to TCP-based media,
including the ability to offer a mix of TCP and UDP-based candidates
for a single stream.

A URL for this Internet-Draft is:
http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-mmusic-ice-tcp-08.txt

Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP at:
ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/

Below is the data which will enable a MIME compliant mail reader
implementation to automatically retrieve the ASCII version of the
Internet-Draft.

---

From: Simon Perreault <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 13 Oct 2009 20:58:48 -0400

On Tuesday 13 October 2009 20:45:01 [email-masked] wrote:
> 	Title           : TCP Candidates with Interactive Connectivity
> Establishment (ICE) Author(s)       : S. Perreault, J. Rosenberg

This new revision is an effort to gauge what is the interest in ICE-TCP and 
where it should go. There is only one change, the addition of this paragraph:

      Note: It has been reported that the simultaneous-open technique
      has a low success rate (~40%) with the population of NAT devices
      in use as of this writing.  Therefore, it is RECOMMENDED that
      implementations of this specification acquire and use IPv6 host
      candidates.  Means of doing so across NATs include Tunnel Setup
      Protocol [I-D.blanchet-v6ops-tunnelbroker-tsp], Teredo [RFC4380],
      IPSec NAT-T [RFC3947], and others.

Two questions for this WG:

- Should this effort be dropped or continue?

- What is needed for this draft to get WG consensus?

Thanks, and sorry for not posting this sooner,
Simon
-- 
DNS64 open-source   --> http://ecdysis.viagenie.ca
STUN/TURN server    --> http://numb.viagenie.ca
vCard 4.0           --> http://www.vcarddav.org