[Standards-JIG] XEP0168 - UDP Sessions - Add UDP handshake

Michal 'vorner' Vaner michal.vaner at kdemail.net
Wed Oct 11 20:58:53 UTC 2006

On Wed, Oct 11, 2006 at 02:52:15PM -0600, Peter Saint-Andre wrote:
> Chris Mullins wrote:
> > Justin Karneges Wrote:
> >> On Wednesday 11 October 2006 11:12, Chris Mullins wrote:
> >>> To fix this, I would like to see an actual UDP handshake added into
> > the
> >>> protocol. This would make certain the connection is live before we
> >>> proceed and tell the user everything is up and running.
> > 
> >> This is exactly what XEP-0176 (Jingle ICE Transport) is for.
> > 
> > The problem is that XEP-0168 doesn't require ICE. It simply says, "Send
> > your IP Address" and from there you're done. There's no requirement to
> > use ICE. Past experience says a number of people will implement XEP-0168
> > in a way that doesn't actually work with NAT and Firewalls. I would like
> > to see that prevented, by having a working handshake over the new
> > channel be a requirement for completion.
> > 
> The intent is that XEP-0176 (ICE) and XEP-0177 (Raw UDP) will be used
> together. Unfortunately, we can't advance XEP-0176 until the IETF's ICE
> spec has been approved.
Maybe add a note into the Raw UDP (or jingle) to consider ICE instead,
if possible? (Point out the problem there) - Developers wouldn't (most
of them) do thing that would not much work on purpose. (And they do not
need any jingles and so, if they do not have NATs).

This is a terroristic email. It will explode in 10 minutes, 
if you do not close it in the meantime.

Michal "vorner" Vaner
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://mail.jabber.org/pipermail/standards/attachments/20061011/3e9244e2/attachment.sig>

More information about the Standards mailing list