[rtcweb] URI Scheme for TURN Configuration

snandaku <snandaku@cisco.com> Sat, 18 February 2012 06:47 UTC

User-Agent: Microsoft-Entourage/12.28.0.101117
Date: Fri, 17 Feb 2012 22:47:34 -0800
From: snandaku <snandaku@cisco.com>
To: "rtcweb@ietf.org" <rtcweb@ietf.org>, "public-webrtc@w3.org" <public-webrtc-request@w3.org>
Message-ID: <CB648986.404A%snandaku@cisco.com>
Thread-Topic: URI Scheme for TURN Configuration
Thread-Index: Acztvisgg+aSg30roEqjs2l7hTwgaQASwZnZ
In-Reply-To: <CB640BA7.4006%snandaku@cisco.com>
Mime-version: 1.0
Content-type: multipart/alternative; boundary="B_3412363654_69311335"
Subject: [rtcweb] URI Scheme for TURN Configuration
Precedence: list

Hello All

        We have submitted a proposal to IETF BEHAVE WG on URI scheme
representing TURN configuration. Draft can be retrieved at :(
http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-petithuguenin-behave-turn-uris-00)
>        
>  We presented the idea at the BEHAVE interim today and it was positively
> received. The BEHAVE chairs were interested in obtaining a signoff on choosing
> URI scheme against proposals based on string representation or JSON for the
> matter. We would like to get opinions and thoughts around this approach from
> RTCWeb/WebRTC chairs and the members.
> 
> 
>     Below we have summarized the motivation and some samples from the draft
> for a quick reference.
> 
>     Motivation for the TURN URI Scheme in the context of RTCWeb
>         -TURN protocol is  used to establish candidates to perform ICE
> connectivity checks.
>         - Current proposal in the spec based on string representation has
> inherent shortcomings and is not future proof (say ipv6:port scenarios)
>         - An URI scheme with well defined grammar SHALL help in the following
> ways
>                     Provide UNIVERSAL way to configure TURN Server
> configuration to myriad of RTCWeb Clients/Web Applications
>                     Enhance INTEROPERABILITY between implementations by
> standardizing on the URI Scheme across
>                                 Different Browser Vendors, Different Web
> Application Services, Gateways and alike.
>                     Define STANDARD data representation format as enforced by
> the URI scheme
>                     Enable EVOLUTION and FUTURE PROOFING defined by the
> encoding URI syntax grammar
>                    Immediate  BENEFITS can be realized from current proposals
> for things like IPv6 support, Unicode user/password,
>                     resolution mechanism, etc.
> 
>         Sample URI
>                 turn:example.org
>                 turns:example.org:8189
>                 turn:example.org?transport=udp
> 
>      We did think about JSON as one possible approach but didn¹t pursue
> further for few reasons mentioned below
>             JSON is nice for web browser (theory), but it¹s useful to keep in
> mind that:
>>> ·         Just doing an eval on a JSON object is a bad idea, so it has to
>>> be parsed with parsing logic  no benefit in terms of processing
>>> ·         It¹s harder for a human to compose a JSON object, but URIs are
>>> more widely understood
>>> ·         JavaScript is the popular language today, but Google and others
>>> will come along with new programming languages (witness: DART) and then
>>> what?  Will JSON be as attractive? I suspect URIs will be.
>>> ·         We want this to be useful in places outside the browser, so JSON
>>> should not be the first thought
> 
> 
>   Apart from the above reasons, going with URI scheme will permit to simplify
> the text in the W3C document by referencin RFC 5928 and the future TURN URI
> RFC.  That cannot be a bad thing.  A third motivation is that as the TURN URI
> is done in a different WG, this permits to do this work in parallel to RTCWEB
> (that probably does not need more distractions).
> 
>  RTCWeb impacts millions of end-points and we strongly believe providing
> standard way to provision and configure TURN/STUN information would be really
> effective.
> 
> 
> 
> Please let us know your thoughts and support in this approach
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Regards
> Suhas Nandakumar
> Marc Petit Huhuenin
> Gonzalo Salgueiro
> Paul E Jones

[rtcweb] URI Scheme for TURN Configuration snandaku
[rtcweb] URI Scheme for TURN Configuration snandaku
Re: [rtcweb] URI Scheme for TURN Configuration Iñaki Baz Castillo