[Standards] Do we need STUN?

Sean Egan seanegan at gmail.com
Fri Mar 9 01:33:00 UTC 2007


On 3/8/07, Евгений Храмцов <xramtsov at gmail.com> wrote:
>  No problem. Can you tell me why should we re-invent another packet format
> since we already have ASN.1 for binary protocols?

I honestly don't know what motivated the design of their packet
format, but hopefully you see the irony in your complaint. ;)

>  By the way, I didn't see implementations of the RFC3489bis. RFC3489bis and
> RFC3489 are very different protocols.

I'm not familiar with RFC 3489bis and the changelog doesn't mention
any hugely incompatible changes. What are the problems you have with
it?

Of course 3489bis is still an internet-draft and will probably be more
widely implemented when it's approved as an RFC.


More information about the Standards mailing list