RE: TURN URL syntax confusion

Hi Adam

   The user part in the URI scheme was hugely debated due to its security implications and was termed as "not-a-good" URI design to include any credentials as part of the URI.

Hence the user part was dropped from the initial proposals after reviews from various standard groups - rtcweb, behave and so on.

We as authors are in the process of taking the drafts (draft-nandakumar-rtcweb-stun-uri-03, draft-petithuguenin-behave-turn-uri-03<http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-petithuguenin-behave-turn-uri-03#appendix-A.4>) to the Last Call and would like to hear if there any blockers in doing so.


Thanks
Suhas

________________________________
From: Adam Roach [adam@nostrum.com]
Sent: Tuesday, January 22, 2013 10:38 AM
To: public-webrtc@w3.org
Subject: TURN URL syntax confusion

In discussing our implementation of STUN and TURN URIs, it became apparent that there is a mismatch between what is currently proposed in the IETF and what is given as an example in the most recent W3C WebRTC editor's draft (as well as assumptions around what parameters are needed for defining an ICE server configuration record).

>From http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-petithuguenin-behave-turn-uri-03#appendix-A.4


      <username> is not used in the URIs because it is not used to guide
      the resolution mechanism.

>From http://dev.w3.org/2011/webrtc/editor/webrtc.html#rtcconfiguration-type


An example array of RTCIceServer objects is:

[ { url:"stun:stun.example.net" } , { url:"turn:user@turn.example.org"<mailto:turn:user@turn.example.org>, credential:"myPassword"} ]

These need to be harmonized. I suspect we really need to define RTCIceServer to contain an optional "user" parameter of type DOMString, and give the example as:

[ { url:"stun:stun.example.net" } , { url:"turn:turn.example.org", user:"myUsername", credential:"myPassword"} ]

/a