[Standards] Proposed XMPP Extension: STUN Server Discovery forJingle
stpeter at jabber.org
Tue Mar 27 22:14:53 UTC 2007
Matt Tucker wrote:
> * Shouldn't the port value be optional? STUN typically operates at a
> well-known port of 3478. If no port is specified, it would be a good
> idea for the client to check DNS SRV for the host first, then use the
> default port if that fails.
True, I'll fix that.
> Also, what do you think of making this a more generic public address
> discovery XEP rather than specific to STUN? When an XMPP server is
> connected to the public internet, it will obviously already know your
> public IP address.
If you are directly connected to the server, yes. Not if you went
through an HTTP proxy or some specialized connection manager.
> That feature combined with STUN makes for a very easy
> way to gather a complete candidate list. I'm pretty sure Thiago sent you
> a private email with some specific protocol syntax ideas about this.
I'm open to suggestions. Though I think the "please tell me my external
IP address" feature is a different beast, no?
> Finally, a more detailed discussion of why public address discovery is
> needed for media exchanges might make this XEP more accessible to
Got suggested text? :)
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Size: 7358 bytes
Desc: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
More information about the Standards