On Sat, Nov 2, 2024 at 5:12 PM Paul Wouters <paul@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On Nov 2, 2024, at 21:54, John Levine <johnl@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> I can imagine situations on private networks where it might be useful. Despite
> what some other people (not you) keep asserting, we do not know all of the nooks
> and crannies where devices might be using features like TURN in ways that make
> sense. So my inclination would be to change nothing, or at most a short note
Not having an opinion on TURN myself, I find this reasoning odd. If we would apply this reasoning to TLS, we’d still insist people implement SSLv2, SSLv3, TLS 1.0 and TLS 1.1. Because who knows what devices people still run anywhere. It basically means you can never obsolete anything.
There are products to deal with this TLS problem, and other networking problems, as it happens. A good example is this one, for $25:
On the downstream port, you run something like this one on really old Macs:
"ethtool -s eth1 speed 10 duplex half autoneg off"
and then some "sysctl" and "iptables" commands.
I guess the general issue is that these things become easier to bridge as tiny ARM boxes are cheaper to install than replacing the old stuff. But that's really only if you must have the old stuff running (plausible if it's a database you don't want to touch, or something like that).
thanks,
Rob
-- last-call mailing list -- last-call@xxxxxxxx To unsubscribe send an email to last-call-leave@xxxxxxxx
