> On 27 Jul 2016, at 17:18, Joe Touch <to...@isi.edu> wrote: > > Olle, > > On 7/27/2016 5:41 AM, Olle E. Johansson wrote: >> ... >> >> This mess caused me sadly to suggest that we need to discuss breaking the >> assumption that TCP delivery is always reliable >> and implement retransmits even over TCP in the STUN protocol. STUN was >> designed to discover middleboxes >> with a focus on NAT. This is just another middle box to discover. > None of this is news. One of the "features" of middleboxes is > "transparent" TCP relaying. That device always destroys TCP reliable > delivery semantics. Even more sad - I just discovered them. > > This has been known since the mid 90s'. > > The challenge with STUN has always been that many middleboxes *do not > want to be found*. Which is one reason to improve STUN - right?
> >> The bigger picture is even more scary - what happens if our reliable >> transport suddenly no longer is reliable? >> >> One developer from a well known mobile system vendor said “well, I guess >> that using TLS may help”… > > Ask them *how* they think TLS helps. TLS relies on TCP semantics. I asked the very same question, got no answer. Will get back to them. /O
