draft-ietf-rtcweb-ip-handling-08.txt   draft-ietf-rtcweb-ip-handling-09.txt 
Network Working Group J. Uberti Network Working Group J. Uberti
Internet-Draft Google Internet-Draft Google
Intended status: Standards Track G. Shieh Intended status: Standards Track G. Shieh
Expires: December 5, 2018 Facebook Expires: December 15, 2018 Facebook
June 3, 2018 June 13, 2018
WebRTC IP Address Handling Requirements WebRTC IP Address Handling Requirements
draft-ietf-rtcweb-ip-handling-08 draft-ietf-rtcweb-ip-handling-09
Abstract Abstract
This document provides information and requirements for how IP This document provides information and requirements for how IP
addresses should be handled by WebRTC implementations. addresses should be handled by WebRTC implementations.
Status of This Memo Status of This Memo
This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with the This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with the
provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79. provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79.
skipping to change at page 1, line 32 skipping to change at page 1, line 32
Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering
Task Force (IETF). Note that other groups may also distribute Task Force (IETF). Note that other groups may also distribute
working documents as Internet-Drafts. The list of current Internet- working documents as Internet-Drafts. The list of current Internet-
Drafts is at https://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/. Drafts is at https://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/.
Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months
and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any
time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference
material or to cite them other than as "work in progress." material or to cite them other than as "work in progress."
This Internet-Draft will expire on December 5, 2018. This Internet-Draft will expire on December 15, 2018.
Copyright Notice Copyright Notice
Copyright (c) 2018 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the Copyright (c) 2018 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the
document authors. All rights reserved. document authors. All rights reserved.
This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal
Provisions Relating to IETF Documents Provisions Relating to IETF Documents
(https://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of (https://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of
publication of this document. Please review these documents publication of this document. Please review these documents
skipping to change at page 5, line 8 skipping to change at page 5, line 8
2. By default, WebRTC should be able to negotiate direct peer-to- 2. By default, WebRTC should be able to negotiate direct peer-to-
peer connections between endpoints (i.e., without traversing a peer connections between endpoints (i.e., without traversing a
NAT or relay server), by providing a minimal set of local IP NAT or relay server), by providing a minimal set of local IP
addresses to the application for use in the ICE process. This addresses to the application for use in the ICE process. This
ensures that applications that need true peer-to-peer routing for ensures that applications that need true peer-to-peer routing for
bandwidth or latency reasons can operate successfully. However, bandwidth or latency reasons can operate successfully. However,
it should be possible to suppress these addresses (with the it should be possible to suppress these addresses (with the
resultant impact on direct connections) if desired. resultant impact on direct connections) if desired.
3. By default, WebRTC traffic should not be sent through application 3. By default, WebRTC traffic should not be sent through proxy
proxy servers, due to the media quality problems associated with servers, due to the media quality problems associated with
sending WebRTC traffic over TCP, which is almost always used when sending WebRTC traffic over TCP, which is almost always used when
communicating with such proxies, as well as proxy performance communicating with such proxies, as well as proxy performance
issues that may result from proxying WebRTC's long-lived, high- issues that may result from proxying WebRTC's long-lived, high-
bandwidth connections. However, it should be possible to force bandwidth connections. However, it should be possible to force
WebRTC to send its traffic through a configured proxy if desired. WebRTC to send its traffic through a configured proxy if desired.
5.2. Modes and Recommendations 5.2. Modes and Recommendations
Based on these ideas, we define four specific modes of WebRTC Based on these ideas, we define four specific modes of WebRTC
behavior, reflecting different media quality/privacy tradeoffs: behavior, reflecting different media quality/privacy tradeoffs:
Mode 1: Enumerate all addresses: WebRTC MUST use all network Mode 1: Enumerate all addresses: WebRTC MUST use all network
interfaces to attempt communication with STUN servers, TURN interfaces to attempt communication with STUN servers, TURN
servers, or peers. This will converge on the best media servers, or peers. This will converge on the best media
path, and is ideal when media performance is the highest path, and is ideal when media performance is the highest
priority, but it discloses the most information. priority, but it discloses the most information.
Mode 2: Default route + associated local addresses: WebRTC MUST Mode 2: Default route + associated local addresses: WebRTC MUST
follow the kernel routing table rules, which will typically follow the kernel routing table rules, which will typically
cause media packets to take the same route as the cause media packets to take the same route as the
application's HTTP traffic. If an application TURN server application's HTTP traffic. If an enterprise TURN server is
is present, the preferred route MUST be through this TURN present, the preferred route MUST be through this TURN
server. Once an interface has been chosen, the private IPv4 server. Once an interface has been chosen, the private IPv4
and IPv6 addresses associated with this interface MUST be and IPv6 addresses associated with this interface MUST be
discovered and provided to the application. This ensures discovered and provided to the application. This ensures
that direct connections can still be established in this that direct connections can still be established in this
mode. mode.
Mode 3: Default route only: This is the the same as Mode 2, except Mode 3: Default route only: This is the the same as Mode 2, except
that the associated private addresses MUST NOT be provided; that the associated private addresses MUST NOT be provided;
the only IP addresses gathered are those discovered via the only IP addresses gathered are those discovered via
mechanisms like STUN and TURN (on the default route). This mechanisms like STUN and TURN (on the default route). This
may cause traffic to hairpin through a NAT, fall back to an may cause traffic to hairpin through a NAT, fall back to an
application TURN server, or fail altogether, with resulting application TURN server, or fail altogether, with resulting
quality implications. quality implications.
Mode 4: Force proxy: This is the same as Mode 3, but when the Mode 4: Force proxy: This is the same as Mode 3, but when the
application's HTTP traffic is sent through an application application's HTTP traffic is sent through a proxy, WebRTC
proxy, WebRTC media traffic MUST also be proxied. If the media traffic MUST also be proxied. If the proxy does not
proxy does not support UDP (as is the case for all HTTP and support UDP (as is the case for all HTTP and most SOCKS
most SOCKS [RFC1928] proxies), or the WebRTC implementation [RFC1928] proxies), or the WebRTC implementation does not
does not support UDP proxying, the use of UDP will be support UDP proxying, the use of UDP will be disabled, and
disabled, and TCP will be used to send and receive media TCP will be used to send and receive media through the
through the proxy. Use of TCP will result in reduced media proxy. Use of TCP will result in reduced media quality, in
quality, in addition to any performance considerations addition to any performance considerations associated with
associated with sending all WebRTC media through the proxy sending all WebRTC media through the proxy server.
server.
Mode 1 MUST only be used when user consent has been provided. The Mode 1 MUST only be used when user consent has been provided. The
details of this consent are left to the implementation; one potential details of this consent are left to the implementation; one potential
mechanism is to tie this consent to getUserMedia consent. mechanism is to tie this consent to getUserMedia consent.
Alternatively, implementations can provide a specific mechanism to Alternatively, implementations can provide a specific mechanism to
obtain user consent. obtain user consent.
In cases where user consent has not been obtained, Mode 2 SHOULD be In cases where user consent has not been obtained, Mode 2 SHOULD be
used. used.
skipping to change at page 9, line 42 skipping to change at page 9, line 42
Time Communication Use Cases and Requirements", RFC 7478, Time Communication Use Cases and Requirements", RFC 7478,
DOI 10.17487/RFC7478, March 2015, DOI 10.17487/RFC7478, March 2015,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7478>. <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7478>.
[RFC8089] Kerwin, M., "The "file" URI Scheme", RFC 8089, [RFC8089] Kerwin, M., "The "file" URI Scheme", RFC 8089,
DOI 10.17487/RFC8089, February 2017, DOI 10.17487/RFC8089, February 2017,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8089>. <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8089>.
Appendix A. Change log Appendix A. Change log
Changes in draft -09:
o Fixed confusing text regarding enterprise TURN servers.
Changes in draft -08: Changes in draft -08:
o Discuss how enterprise TURN servers should be handled. o Discuss how enterprise TURN servers should be handled.
Changes in draft -07: Changes in draft -07:
o Clarify consent guidance. o Clarify consent guidance.
Changes in draft -06: Changes in draft -06:
 End of changes. 7 change blocks. 
18 lines changed or deleted 21 lines changed or added

This html diff was produced by rfcdiff 1.46. The latest version is available from http://tools.ietf.org/tools/rfcdiff/