[Standards] Do we need STUN?

Peter Saint-Andre stpeter at jabber.org
Sat Mar 17 03:26:21 UTC 2007


Sorry, got behind on mail, just catching up.

Sean Egan wrote:
> On 3/8/07, Evgeniy Khramtsov <xramtsov at gmail.com> wrote:

<snip/>

>> 2) Lack of integration with XMPP services.
>> I don't see any methods how to authenticate XMPP-users on the STUN/TURN
>> server.
> 
> Right now XEP 176 (The ICE transport) says you should use disco to
> locate a STUN server to use. Because you often need more than just a
> single STUN server to get through NATs and firewalls, Google Talk uses
> a simple "get" protocol to locate a STUN server, relay servers, and
> relay server authentication:
> http://code.google.com/apis/talk/jep_extensions/jingleinfo.html

Yes, as previously discussed, we need to formalize something like that. 
Somehow it slipped my mind over the last few weeks of travel...

Peter

-- 
Peter Saint-Andre
XMPP Standards Foundation
http://www.xmpp.org/xsf/people/stpeter.shtml

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: smime.p7s
Type: application/x-pkcs7-signature
Size: 7358 bytes
Desc: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
URL: <http://mail.jabber.org/pipermail/standards/attachments/20070316/e6eaf5d2/attachment.bin>


More information about the Standards mailing list