7 ms·

WebRTC depends on some message transport (using http) existing first between peers before the data channel can be established . That's far from equivalent capab

WebRTC depends on some message transport (using http) existing first between peers before the data channel can be established . That's far from equivalent capability to direct sockets.

lifthrasiir 2y ago
Not only that, but DTLS is mandated for any UDP connections.
- modeless 2y ago
  Is that a problem? Again, I'm talking about the scenario where you control both sides of the connection, not where you're trying to use UDP to communicate with a third party service.
  - lifthrasiir 2y ago
    I think all three comments including mine are essentially saying the same but in different viewpoints.
modeless 2y ago
Yes, you do need a connection establishment server, but in most cases traffic can flow directly between peers after connection establishment. The reality of the modern internet is even with native sockets many if not most peers will not be able to establish a direct peer-to-peer connection without the involvement of a connection establishment server anyway due to firewalls, NAT, etc. So it's not as big of a downgrade as you might think.
- huggingmouth 2y ago
  That changed (ahm.. will change) with ipv6. I was surprised to see that I can reach residential ipv6 lan hosts directly from the server. No firewalls, no nat. This remains true even with abusive isps that only give out /64 blocks. That said, I agree that peer to peer will never be seemless thanks mostly to said abusive isps.
  - theamk 2y ago
    I sure hope not, this will bring in a new era for internet worms. If some ISPs are not currently firewalling all incoming IPv6 connections, it's a major security risk. I hope some security researcher raises boise about that soon, and the firewalls will go closed by default.
    - 1oooqooq 2y ago
      it kinda of already begun
      - modeless 2y ago
        Has there been a big ipv6 worm? I thought that the defense against worms was that scanning the address space was impractical due to the large size.
        1oooqooq 2y ago
        i don't think they scan the entire space. but even before that there were ones abusing bonjour/upnp which is what chrome will bring back with this feature.
    - immibis 2y ago
      My home router seems to have a stateful firewall and so does my cellphone in tethering mode - I don't know whether that one's implemented on the phone (under my control) or the network. Firewalling goes back in the control of the user in most cases - the other day we on IRC told someone how to unblock port 80 on their home router.
  - apitman 2y ago
    IPv6 isn't going to happen. Most people's needs are met by NAT for clients and SNI routing for servers. We ran out of IPv4 addresses years ago. If it was actually a problem it would have happened then. It makes me said for the p2p internet but it's true.

WebRTC depends on some message transport (using http) existing first between peers before the data channel can be established . That's far from equivalent capability to direct sockets.

lifthrasiir 2y ago

Not only that, but DTLS is mandated for any UDP connections.

modeless 2y ago
Is that a problem? Again, I'm talking about the scenario where you control both sides of the connection, not where you're trying to use UDP to communicate with a third party service.
- lifthrasiir 2y ago
  I think all three comments including mine are essentially saying the same but in different viewpoints.

modeless 2y ago

Yes, you do need a connection establishment server, but in most cases traffic can flow directly between peers after connection establishment. The reality of the modern internet is even with native sockets many if not most peers will not be able to establish a direct peer-to-peer connection without the involvement of a connection establishment server anyway due to firewalls, NAT, etc. So it's not as big of a downgrade as you might think.

huggingmouth 2y ago
That changed (ahm.. will change) with ipv6. I was surprised to see that I can reach residential ipv6 lan hosts directly from the server. No firewalls, no nat. This remains true even with abusive isps that only give out /64 blocks. That said, I agree that peer to peer will never be seemless thanks mostly to said abusive isps.
- theamk 2y ago
  I sure hope not, this will bring in a new era for internet worms. If some ISPs are not currently firewalling all incoming IPv6 connections, it's a major security risk. I hope some security researcher raises boise about that soon, and the firewalls will go closed by default.
  - 1oooqooq 2y ago
    it kinda of already begun
    - modeless 2y ago
      Has there been a big ipv6 worm? I thought that the defense against worms was that scanning the address space was impractical due to the large size.
      - 1oooqooq 2y ago
        i don't think they scan the entire space. but even before that there were ones abusing bonjour/upnp which is what chrome will bring back with this feature.
  - immibis 2y ago
    My home router seems to have a stateful firewall and so does my cellphone in tethering mode - I don't know whether that one's implemented on the phone (under my control) or the network. Firewalling goes back in the control of the user in most cases - the other day we on IRC told someone how to unblock port 80 on their home router.
- apitman 2y ago
  IPv6 isn't going to happen. Most people's needs are met by NAT for clients and SNI routing for servers. We ran out of IPv4 addresses years ago. If it was actually a problem it would have happened then. It makes me said for the p2p internet but it's true.