draft-ietf-avtcore-rfc5764-mux-fixes-10.txt   draft-ietf-avtcore-rfc5764-mux-fixes-11.txt 
AVTCORE M. Petit-Huguenin AVTCORE M. Petit-Huguenin
Internet-Draft Impedance Mismatch Internet-Draft Impedance Mismatch
Updates: 5764 (if approved) G. Salgueiro Updates: 5764 (if approved) G. Salgueiro
Intended status: Standards Track Cisco Systems Intended status: Standards Track Cisco Systems
Expires: January 6, 2017 July 5, 2016 Expires: March 5, 2017 September 1, 2016
Multiplexing Scheme Updates for Secure Real-time Transport Protocol Multiplexing Scheme Updates for Secure Real-time Transport Protocol
(SRTP) Extension for Datagram Transport Layer Security (DTLS) (SRTP) Extension for Datagram Transport Layer Security (DTLS)
draft-ietf-avtcore-rfc5764-mux-fixes-10 draft-ietf-avtcore-rfc5764-mux-fixes-11
Abstract Abstract
This document defines how Datagram Transport Layer Security (DTLS), This document defines how Datagram Transport Layer Security (DTLS),
Real-time Transport Protocol (RTP), RTP Control Protocol (RTCP), Real-time Transport Protocol (RTP), RTP Control Protocol (RTCP),
Session Traversal Utilities for NAT (STUN), Traversal Using Relays Session Traversal Utilities for NAT (STUN), Traversal Using Relays
around NAT (TURN), and ZRTP packets are multiplexed on a single around NAT (TURN), and ZRTP packets are multiplexed on a single
receiving socket. It overrides the guidance from RFC 5764 ("SRTP receiving socket. It overrides the guidance from RFC 5764 ("SRTP
Extension for DTLS"), which suffered from four issues described and Extension for DTLS"), which suffered from four issues described and
fixed in this document. fixed in this document.
skipping to change at page 1, line 40 skipping to change at page 1, line 40
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 http://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/. Drafts is at http://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 January 6, 2017. This Internet-Draft will expire on March 5, 2017.
Copyright Notice Copyright Notice
Copyright (c) 2016 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the Copyright (c) 2016 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
(http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of (http://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 2, line 43 skipping to change at page 2, line 43
9. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 9. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
9.1. STUN Methods . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 9.1. STUN Methods . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
9.2. TLS ContentType . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 9.2. TLS ContentType . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
9.3. Traversal Using Relays around NAT (TURN) Channel Numbers 10 9.3. Traversal Using Relays around NAT (TURN) Channel Numbers 10
10. Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 10. Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
11. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 11. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
11.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 11.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
11.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 11.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
Appendix A. Release notes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 Appendix A. Release notes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
A.1. Modifications between draft-ietf-avtcore-rfc5764-mux- A.1. Modifications between draft-ietf-avtcore-rfc5764-mux-
fixes-10 and draft-ietf-avtcore-rfc5764-mux-fixes-09 . . 12 fixes-11 and draft-ietf-avtcore-rfc5764-mux-fixes-10 . . 12
A.2. Modifications between draft-ietf-avtcore-rfc5764-mux- A.2. Modifications between draft-ietf-avtcore-rfc5764-mux-
fixes-09 and draft-ietf-avtcore-rfc5764-mux-fixes-08 . . 13 fixes-10 and draft-ietf-avtcore-rfc5764-mux-fixes-09 . . 13
A.3. Modifications between draft-ietf-avtcore-rfc5764-mux- A.3. Modifications between draft-ietf-avtcore-rfc5764-mux-
fixes-08 and draft-ietf-avtcore-rfc5764-mux-fixes-07 . . 13 fixes-09 and draft-ietf-avtcore-rfc5764-mux-fixes-08 . . 13
A.4. Modifications between draft-ietf-avtcore-rfc5764-mux- A.4. Modifications between draft-ietf-avtcore-rfc5764-mux-
fixes-07 and draft-ietf-avtcore-rfc5764-mux-fixes-06 . . 13 fixes-08 and draft-ietf-avtcore-rfc5764-mux-fixes-07 . . 13
A.5. Modifications between draft-ietf-avtcore-rfc5764-mux- A.5. Modifications between draft-ietf-avtcore-rfc5764-mux-
fixes-06 and draft-ietf-avtcore-rfc5764-mux-fixes-05 . . 13 fixes-07 and draft-ietf-avtcore-rfc5764-mux-fixes-06 . . 13
A.6. Modifications between draft-ietf-avtcore-rfc5764-mux- A.6. Modifications between draft-ietf-avtcore-rfc5764-mux-
fixes-05 and draft-ietf-avtcore-rfc5764-mux-fixes-04 . . 13 fixes-06 and draft-ietf-avtcore-rfc5764-mux-fixes-05 . . 13
A.7. Modifications between draft-ietf-avtcore-rfc5764-mux- A.7. Modifications between draft-ietf-avtcore-rfc5764-mux-
fixes-04 and draft-ietf-avtcore-rfc5764-mux-fixes-03 . . 13 fixes-05 and draft-ietf-avtcore-rfc5764-mux-fixes-04 . . 13
A.8. Modifications between draft-ietf-avtcore-rfc5764-mux- A.8. Modifications between draft-ietf-avtcore-rfc5764-mux-
fixes-03 and draft-ietf-avtcore-rfc5764-mux-fixes-02 . . 13 fixes-04 and draft-ietf-avtcore-rfc5764-mux-fixes-03 . . 13
A.9. Modifications between draft-ietf-avtcore-rfc5764-mux- A.9. Modifications between draft-ietf-avtcore-rfc5764-mux-
fixes-02 and draft-ietf-avtcore-rfc5764-mux-fixes-01 . . 13 fixes-03 and draft-ietf-avtcore-rfc5764-mux-fixes-02 . . 14
A.10. Modifications between draft-ietf-avtcore-rfc5764-mux- A.10. Modifications between draft-ietf-avtcore-rfc5764-mux-
fixes-01 and draft-ietf-avtcore-rfc5764-mux-fixes-00 . . 14 fixes-02 and draft-ietf-avtcore-rfc5764-mux-fixes-01 . . 14
A.11. Modifications between draft-ietf-avtcore-rfc5764-mux- A.11. Modifications between draft-ietf-avtcore-rfc5764-mux-
fixes-01 and draft-ietf-avtcore-rfc5764-mux-fixes-00 . . 14
A.12. Modifications between draft-ietf-avtcore-rfc5764-mux-
fixes-00 and draft-petithuguenin-avtcore-rfc5764-mux- fixes-00 and draft-petithuguenin-avtcore-rfc5764-mux-
fixes-02 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14 fixes-02 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
A.12. Modifications between draft-petithuguenin-avtcore-rfc5764 A.13. Modifications between draft-petithuguenin-avtcore-rfc5764
-mux-fixes-00 and draft-petithuguenin-avtcore-rfc5764 -mux-fixes-00 and draft-petithuguenin-avtcore-rfc5764
-mux-fixes-01 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14 -mux-fixes-01 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14 Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
1. Introduction 1. Introduction
Section 5.1.2 of Secure Real-time Transport Protocol (SRTP) Extension Section 5.1.2 of Secure Real-time Transport Protocol (SRTP) Extension
for DTLS [RFC5764] defines a scheme for a Real-time Transport for DTLS [RFC5764] defines a scheme for a Real-time Transport
Protocol (RTP) [RFC3550] receiver to demultiplex Datagram Transport Protocol (RTP) [RFC3550] receiver to demultiplex Datagram Transport
Layer Security (DTLS) [RFC6347], Session Traversal Utilities for NAT Layer Security (DTLS) [RFC6347], Session Traversal Utilities for NAT
(STUN) [RFC5389] and Secure Real-time Transport Protocol (STUN) [RFC5389] and Secure Real-time Transport Protocol
(SRTP)/Secure RTP Control Protocol (SRTCP) [RFC3711] packets that are (SRTP)/Secure RTP Control Protocol (SRTCP) [RFC3711] packets that are
arriving on the RTP port. Unfortunately, this demultiplexing scheme arriving on the RTP port. Unfortunately, this demultiplexing scheme
skipping to change at page 4, line 10 skipping to change at page 4, line 14
Having overlapping ranges between different IANA registries becomes Having overlapping ranges between different IANA registries becomes
an issue when a new codepoint is allocated in one of these registries an issue when a new codepoint is allocated in one of these registries
without carefully analyzing the impact it could have on the other without carefully analyzing the impact it could have on the other
registries when that codepoint is demultiplexed. Among other registries when that codepoint is demultiplexed. Among other
downsides of the bad design of the demultiplexing algorithm detailed downsides of the bad design of the demultiplexing algorithm detailed
in [RFC5764], it creates a requirement for coordination between in [RFC5764], it creates a requirement for coordination between
codepoint assignments where none should exist, and that is codepoint assignments where none should exist, and that is
organizationally and socially undesirable. However, RFC 5764 has organizationally and socially undesirable. However, RFC 5764 has
been widely deployed so there must be an awareness of this issue and been widely deployed so there must be an awareness of this issue and
how it must be dealt with. Thus, even if a codepoint is not how it must be dealt with. Thus, even if the feature related to a
initially thought to be useful, the respective IANA registry expert codepoint is not initially thought to be useful in the context of
should at least raise a flag when the allocated codepoint irrevocably demultiplexing, the respective IANA registry expert should at least
prevents multiplexing. raise a flag when the allocated codepoint irrevocably prevents
multiplexing.
The first goal of this document is to make sure that future The first goal of this document is to make sure that future
allocations in any of the affected protocols are done with the full allocations in any of the affected protocols are done with the full
knowledge of their impact on multiplexing. This is achieved by knowledge of their impact on multiplexing. This is achieved by
updating [RFC5764], which includes modifying the IANA registries with updating [RFC5764], which includes modifying the IANA registries with
instructions for coordination between the protocols at risk. instructions for coordination between the protocols at risk.
A second goal is to permit the addition of new protocols to the list A second goal is to permit the addition of new protocols to the list
of existing multiplexed protocols in a manner that does not break of existing multiplexed protocols in a manner that does not break
existing implementations. existing implementations.
The flaws in the demultiplexing scheme were unavoidably inherited by At the time of this writing, the flaws in the demultiplexing scheme
other documents, such as [RFC7345] and were unavoidably inherited by other documents, such as [RFC7345] and
[I-D.ietf-mmusic-sdp-bundle-negotiation]. So in addition, these and [I-D.ietf-mmusic-sdp-bundle-negotiation]. So in addition, these and
any other affected documents will need to be corrected with the any other affected documents will need to be corrected with the
updates this document provides. updates this document provides.
2. Terminology 2. Terminology
The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT", The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT",
"SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this
document are to be interpreted as described in [RFC2119]. document are to be interpreted as described in [RFC2119].
skipping to change at page 9, line 40 skipping to change at page 9, line 40
9.1. STUN Methods 9.1. STUN Methods
This specification contains the registration information for reserved This specification contains the registration information for reserved
STUN Methods codepoints, as explained in Section 3 and in accordance STUN Methods codepoints, as explained in Section 3 and in accordance
with the procedures defined in Section 18.1 of [RFC5389]. with the procedures defined in Section 18.1 of [RFC5389].
Value: 0x100-0xFFF Value: 0x100-0xFFF
Name: Reserved (MUST be allocated with IETF Review. For DTLS-SRTP Name: Reserved (MUST be allocated with IETF Review. For DTLS-SRTP
multiplexing collision avoidance see RFC XXXX) multiplexing collision avoidance see RFCXXXX)
Reference: RFC5764, RFCXXXX Reference: RFC5764, RFCXXXX
This specification also reassigns the ranges in the STUN Methods This specification also reassigns the ranges in the STUN Methods
Registry as follow: Registry as follow:
Range: 0x000-0x07F Range: 0x000-0x07F
Registration Procedures: IETF Review Registration Procedures: IETF Review
skipping to change at page 10, line 38 skipping to change at page 10, line 38
9.3. Traversal Using Relays around NAT (TURN) Channel Numbers 9.3. Traversal Using Relays around NAT (TURN) Channel Numbers
This specification contains the registration information for reserved This specification contains the registration information for reserved
Traversal Using Relays around NAT (TURN) Channel Numbers codepoints, Traversal Using Relays around NAT (TURN) Channel Numbers codepoints,
as explained in Section 6 and in accordance with the procedures as explained in Section 6 and in accordance with the procedures
defined in Section 18 of [RFC5766]. defined in Section 18 of [RFC5766].
Value: 0x5000-0xFFFF Value: 0x5000-0xFFFF
Name: Reserved (For DTLS-SRTP multiplexing collision avoidance see Name: Reserved (For DTLS-SRTP multiplexing collision avoidance see
RFC XXXX) RFCXXXX)
Reference: RFCXXXX Reference: RFCXXXX
[RFC EDITOR NOTE: Please replace RFCXXXX with the RFC number of this [RFC EDITOR NOTE: Please replace RFCXXXX with the RFC number assigned
document.] to this document (for all instances where this convention is used
throughout this draft).]
10. Acknowledgements 10. Acknowledgements
The implicit STUN Method codepoint allocations problem was first The implicit STUN Method codepoint allocations problem was first
reported by Martin Thomson in the RTCWEB mailing-list and discussed reported by Martin Thomson in the RTCWEB mailing-list and discussed
further with Magnus Westerlund. further with Magnus Westerlund.
Thanks to Simon Perreault, Colton Shields, Cullen Jennings, Colin Thanks to Simon Perreault, Colton Shields, Cullen Jennings, Colin
Perkins, Magnus Westerlund, Paul Jones, Jonathan Lennox, Varun Singh, Perkins, Magnus Westerlund, Paul Jones, Jonathan Lennox, Varun Singh,
Justin Uberti, Joseph Salowey, Martin Thomson, Ben Campbell, Stephen Justin Uberti, Joseph Salowey, Martin Thomson, Ben Campbell, Stephen
Farrell, Alan Johnston and Paul Kyzivat for the comments, Farrell, Alan Johnston, Mehmet Ersue, Matt Miller, Spencer Dawkins,
suggestions, and questions that helped improve this document. Joel Halpern and Paul Kyzivat for the comments, suggestions, and
questions that helped improve this document.
11. References 11. References
11.1. Normative References 11.1. Normative References
[RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate [RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate
Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119,
DOI 10.17487/RFC2119, March 1997, DOI 10.17487/RFC2119, March 1997,
<http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc2119>. <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc2119>.
[RFC3550] Schulzrinne, H., Casner, S., Frederick, R., and V. [RFC3550] Schulzrinne, H., Casner, S., Frederick, R., and V.
Jacobson, "RTP: A Transport Protocol for Real-Time Jacobson, "RTP: A Transport Protocol for Real-Time
Applications", STD 64, RFC 3550, DOI 10.17487/RFC3550, Applications", STD 64, RFC 3550, DOI 10.17487/RFC3550,
July 2003, <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc3550>. July 2003, <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc3550>.
[RFC3711] Baugher, M., McGrew, D., Naslund, M., Carrara, E., and K. [RFC3711] Baugher, M., McGrew, D., Naslund, M., Carrara, E., and K.
Norrman, "The Secure Real-time Transport Protocol (SRTP)", Norrman, "The Secure Real-time Transport Protocol (SRTP)",
RFC 3711, DOI 10.17487/RFC3711, March 2004, RFC 3711, DOI 10.17487/RFC3711, March 2004,
<http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc3711>. <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc3711>.
[RFC4347] Rescorla, E. and N. Modadugu, "Datagram Transport Layer
Security", RFC 4347, DOI 10.17487/RFC4347, April 2006,
<http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc4347>.
[RFC5245] Rosenberg, J., "Interactive Connectivity Establishment [RFC5245] Rosenberg, J., "Interactive Connectivity Establishment
(ICE): A Protocol for Network Address Translator (NAT) (ICE): A Protocol for Network Address Translator (NAT)
Traversal for Offer/Answer Protocols", RFC 5245, Traversal for Offer/Answer Protocols", RFC 5245,
DOI 10.17487/RFC5245, April 2010, DOI 10.17487/RFC5245, April 2010,
<http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc5245>. <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc5245>.
[RFC5246] Dierks, T. and E. Rescorla, "The Transport Layer Security [RFC5246] Dierks, T. and E. Rescorla, "The Transport Layer Security
(TLS) Protocol Version 1.2", RFC 5246, (TLS) Protocol Version 1.2", RFC 5246,
DOI 10.17487/RFC5246, August 2008, DOI 10.17487/RFC5246, August 2008,
<http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc5246>. <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc5246>.
skipping to change at page 12, line 23 skipping to change at page 12, line 17
Traversal Utilities for NAT (STUN)", RFC 5766, Traversal Utilities for NAT (STUN)", RFC 5766,
DOI 10.17487/RFC5766, April 2010, DOI 10.17487/RFC5766, April 2010,
<http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc5766>. <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc5766>.
[RFC6347] Rescorla, E. and N. Modadugu, "Datagram Transport Layer [RFC6347] Rescorla, E. and N. Modadugu, "Datagram Transport Layer
Security Version 1.2", RFC 6347, DOI 10.17487/RFC6347, Security Version 1.2", RFC 6347, DOI 10.17487/RFC6347,
January 2012, <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc6347>. January 2012, <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc6347>.
11.2. Informative References 11.2. Informative References
[RFC4347] Rescorla, E. and N. Modadugu, "Datagram Transport Layer
Security", RFC 4347, DOI 10.17487/RFC4347, April 2006,
<http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc4347>.
[RFC6189] Zimmermann, P., Johnston, A., Ed., and J. Callas, "ZRTP: [RFC6189] Zimmermann, P., Johnston, A., Ed., and J. Callas, "ZRTP:
Media Path Key Agreement for Unicast Secure RTP", Media Path Key Agreement for Unicast Secure RTP",
RFC 6189, DOI 10.17487/RFC6189, April 2011, RFC 6189, DOI 10.17487/RFC6189, April 2011,
<http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc6189>. <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc6189>.
[RFC7345] Holmberg, C., Sedlacek, I., and G. Salgueiro, "UDP [RFC7345] Holmberg, C., Sedlacek, I., and G. Salgueiro, "UDP
Transport Layer (UDPTL) over Datagram Transport Layer Transport Layer (UDPTL) over Datagram Transport Layer
Security (DTLS)", RFC 7345, DOI 10.17487/RFC7345, August Security (DTLS)", RFC 7345, DOI 10.17487/RFC7345, August
2014, <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7345>. 2014, <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7345>.
[I-D.ietf-mmusic-sdp-bundle-negotiation] [I-D.ietf-mmusic-sdp-bundle-negotiation]
Holmberg, C., Alvestrand, H., and C. Jennings, Holmberg, C., Alvestrand, H., and C. Jennings,
"Negotiating Media Multiplexing Using the Session "Negotiating Media Multiplexing Using the Session
Description Protocol (SDP)", draft-ietf-mmusic-sdp-bundle- Description Protocol (SDP)", draft-ietf-mmusic-sdp-bundle-
negotiation-31 (work in progress), June 2016. negotiation-32 (work in progress), August 2016.
Appendix A. Release notes Appendix A. Release notes
This section must be removed before publication as an RFC. This section must be removed before publication as an RFC.
A.1. Modifications between draft-ietf-avtcore-rfc5764-mux-fixes-10 and A.1. Modifications between draft-ietf-avtcore-rfc5764-mux-fixes-11 and
draft-ietf-avtcore-rfc5764-mux-fixes-10
o Addressed comments from AD review (editorial).
o Addressed comments from Gen-ART, Sec-Dir and OPS-Dir reviews.
A.2. Modifications between draft-ietf-avtcore-rfc5764-mux-fixes-10 and
draft-ietf-avtcore-rfc5764-mux-fixes-09 draft-ietf-avtcore-rfc5764-mux-fixes-09
o Removed Implementation Status section. o Removed Implementation Status section.
o Updated based on Magnus Westerlund's LC review comments. o Updated based on Magnus Westerlund's LC review comments.
A.2. Modifications between draft-ietf-avtcore-rfc5764-mux-fixes-09 and o On advice of EKR changed boilerplate to pre5378Trust200902.
A.3. Modifications between draft-ietf-avtcore-rfc5764-mux-fixes-09 and
draft-ietf-avtcore-rfc5764-mux-fixes-08 draft-ietf-avtcore-rfc5764-mux-fixes-08
o Added ZRTP awareness to demultiplexing logic. o Added ZRTP awareness to demultiplexing logic.
A.3. Modifications between draft-ietf-avtcore-rfc5764-mux-fixes-08 and A.4. Modifications between draft-ietf-avtcore-rfc5764-mux-fixes-08 and
draft-ietf-avtcore-rfc5764-mux-fixes-07 draft-ietf-avtcore-rfc5764-mux-fixes-07
o Minor update to Security Considerations section. o Minor update to Security Considerations section.
A.4. Modifications between draft-ietf-avtcore-rfc5764-mux-fixes-07 and A.5. Modifications between draft-ietf-avtcore-rfc5764-mux-fixes-07 and
draft-ietf-avtcore-rfc5764-mux-fixes-06 draft-ietf-avtcore-rfc5764-mux-fixes-06
o Addresses Martin Thomson, Ben Campbell and Stephen Farrell's o Addresses Martin Thomson, Ben Campbell and Stephen Farrell's
review comments about TLS ContentType registrations. review comments about TLS ContentType registrations.
A.5. Modifications between draft-ietf-avtcore-rfc5764-mux-fixes-06 and A.6. Modifications between draft-ietf-avtcore-rfc5764-mux-fixes-06 and
draft-ietf-avtcore-rfc5764-mux-fixes-05 draft-ietf-avtcore-rfc5764-mux-fixes-05
o Addresses Colin's WGLC review comments o Addresses Colin's WGLC review comments
A.6. Modifications between draft-ietf-avtcore-rfc5764-mux-fixes-05 and A.7. Modifications between draft-ietf-avtcore-rfc5764-mux-fixes-05 and
draft-ietf-avtcore-rfc5764-mux-fixes-04 draft-ietf-avtcore-rfc5764-mux-fixes-04
o Removed some remnants of the ordering from Section 6 o Removed some remnants of the ordering from Section 6
o Moved Terminology from Section 5 to Section 2 o Moved Terminology from Section 5 to Section 2
A.7. Modifications between draft-ietf-avtcore-rfc5764-mux-fixes-04 and A.8. Modifications between draft-ietf-avtcore-rfc5764-mux-fixes-04 and
draft-ietf-avtcore-rfc5764-mux-fixes-03 draft-ietf-avtcore-rfc5764-mux-fixes-03
o Removed Section on "Demultiplexing Algorithm Test Order" o Removed Section on "Demultiplexing Algorithm Test Order"
o Split the Introduction into separate sections o Split the Introduction into separate sections
A.8. Modifications between draft-ietf-avtcore-rfc5764-mux-fixes-03 and A.9. Modifications between draft-ietf-avtcore-rfc5764-mux-fixes-03 and
draft-ietf-avtcore-rfc5764-mux-fixes-02 draft-ietf-avtcore-rfc5764-mux-fixes-02
o Revert to the RFC 5389, as the stunbis reference was needed only o Revert to the RFC 5389, as the stunbis reference was needed only
for STUN over SCTP. for STUN over SCTP.
A.9. Modifications between draft-ietf-avtcore-rfc5764-mux-fixes-02 and A.10. Modifications between draft-ietf-avtcore-rfc5764-mux-fixes-02 and
draft-ietf-avtcore-rfc5764-mux-fixes-01 draft-ietf-avtcore-rfc5764-mux-fixes-01
o Remove any discussion about SCTP until a consensus emerges in o Remove any discussion about SCTP until a consensus emerges in
TRAM. TRAM.
A.10. Modifications between draft-ietf-avtcore-rfc5764-mux-fixes-01 and A.11. Modifications between draft-ietf-avtcore-rfc5764-mux-fixes-01 and
draft-ietf-avtcore-rfc5764-mux-fixes-00 draft-ietf-avtcore-rfc5764-mux-fixes-00
o Instead of allocating the values that are common on each registry, o Instead of allocating the values that are common on each registry,
the specification now only reserves them, giving the possibility the specification now only reserves them, giving the possibility
to allocate them in case muxing is irrelevant. to allocate them in case muxing is irrelevant.
o STUN range is now 0-3m with 2-3 being Designated Expert. o STUN range is now 0-3m with 2-3 being Designated Expert.
o TLS ContentType 0-19 and 64-255 are now reserved. o TLS ContentType 0-19 and 64-255 are now reserved.
skipping to change at page 14, line 29 skipping to change at page 14, line 41
TURN channels packets then the whole channel numbers are TURN channels packets then the whole channel numbers are
available. available.
o If not the prefix is between 64 and 79. o If not the prefix is between 64 and 79.
o First byte test order is now by incremental values, so failure is o First byte test order is now by incremental values, so failure is
deterministic. deterministic.
o Redraw the demuxing diagram. o Redraw the demuxing diagram.
A.11. Modifications between draft-ietf-avtcore-rfc5764-mux-fixes-00 and A.12. Modifications between draft-ietf-avtcore-rfc5764-mux-fixes-00 and
draft-petithuguenin-avtcore-rfc5764-mux-fixes-02 draft-petithuguenin-avtcore-rfc5764-mux-fixes-02
o Adoption by WG. o Adoption by WG.
o Add reference to STUNbis. o Add reference to STUNbis.
A.12. Modifications between draft-petithuguenin-avtcore-rfc5764-mux- A.13. Modifications between draft-petithuguenin-avtcore-rfc5764-mux-
fixes-00 and draft-petithuguenin-avtcore-rfc5764-mux-fixes-01 fixes-00 and draft-petithuguenin-avtcore-rfc5764-mux-fixes-01
o Change affiliation. o Change affiliation.
Authors' Addresses Authors' Addresses
Marc Petit-Huguenin Marc Petit-Huguenin
Impedance Mismatch Impedance Mismatch
Email: marc@petit-huguenin.org Email: marc@petit-huguenin.org
 End of changes. 37 change blocks. 
46 lines changed or deleted 60 lines changed or added

This html diff was produced by rfcdiff 1.45. The latest version is available from http://tools.ietf.org/tools/rfcdiff/