On Sep 6, 2016, at 11:34 PM 9/6/16, Tirumaleswar Reddy (tireddy)
<tireddy(_at_)cisco(_dot_)com> wrote:
Hi Ralph,
Please see inline [TR]
From: Ralph Droms [mailto:rdroms(_dot_)ietf(_at_)gmail(_dot_)com
<mailto:rdroms(_dot_)ietf(_at_)gmail(_dot_)com>]
Sent: Thursday, September 1, 2016 4:36 PM
To: Jari Arkko <jari(_dot_)arkko(_at_)piuha(_dot_)net
<mailto:jari(_dot_)arkko(_at_)piuha(_dot_)net>>
Cc: Tirumaleswar Reddy (tireddy) <tireddy(_at_)cisco(_dot_)com
<mailto:tireddy(_at_)cisco(_dot_)com>>;
draft-ietf-tram-turn-server-discovery(_dot_)all(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
<mailto:draft-ietf-tram-turn-server-discovery(_dot_)all(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org>;
Review Area gen-art(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org <mailto:gen-art(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org>
Team <gen-art(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org <mailto:gen-art(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org>>; IETF
discussion list <ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org <mailto:ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org>>
Subject: Re: Review of draft-ietf-tram-turn-server-discovery-08
I just completed a quick review of draft-ietf-tram-turn-server-discovery-08.
The DNS Service Discovery section is much improved. I have a couple of
comments on the revised text:
I suggest adding a reference to the IANa "Service Name and Transport Protocol
Port Number Registry",
http://www.iana.org/assignments/service-names-port-numbers/service-names-port-numbers.xhtml?search=Turn
<http://www.iana.org/assignments/service-names-port-numbers/service-names-port-numbers.xhtml?search=Turn>,
as the source of the service names "turn" and "turns".
[TR] Will refer to RFC5766 which introduced the above service names.
OK.
While the example DNS records for "exampleco TURN Server" are technically
correct, they would most likely be generated by the DNS-SD/mDNS library in a
server, rather than appearing in a DNS server zone file somewhere. For
clarity, it might be better to use the unicast DNS versions of the DNS-SD
records by substituting "example.com <http://example.com/>" for "local".
[TR] May be I am missing something,
https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc6763#section-4.1.1
<https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc6763#section-4.1.1> says the instance name
will not be machine-generated and will be a user-friendly name.
Right - the instance name, in this case "example TURN Server", is a configured,
user-friendly name. But the responses to mDNS queries for, e.g.,
_turn._udp.local. and "exampleco TURN Server"._turn._udp.local. will be
generated by the DNS-SD/mDNS code on the host providing the service instance.
It's just a minor point...
In my opinion, the details in section 5.1 are redundant with and (possibly)
not identical to the specification in RFC 6762 and RFC 6763. Specifically,
Figure 1 includes a typo; there should be separate A/AAAA query and reply
messages. More generally, DNS-SD/mDNS servers may return the SRV, TXT, A and
AAAA records in the first reply, as an optimization. I think it would be
better, in this document, to specify simply that TURN servers and clients use
the message exchanges specified in those RFCs for TURN server discovery.
[TR] Sure, will remove the figure.
OK.
- Ralph
Thanks and Regards,
-Tiru
- Ralph
On Sep 1, 2016, at 4:05 AM, Jari Arkko <jari(_dot_)arkko(_at_)piuha(_dot_)net
<mailto:jari(_dot_)arkko(_at_)piuha(_dot_)net>> wrote:
Ralph, Tiru — thanks for the updates and the review. I’ve looked at the
change draft and I think it is fine now.
Jari
signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail