support for Microsoft ICE/STUN/TURN clients

[GoogleCodeExporter]

Microsoft Lync includes a Microsoft TURN server promoted under the name "Edge" 
server.

Some clients (e.g. Polycom phones with new firmware) claim to be limited to 
work only with the Microsoft permutation of ICE/STUN/TURN rather than the IETF 
official version.

Are you aware of how Microsoft's variation of the protocol differs?  E.g. does 
it use Microsoft authentication hashes rather than md5(A1) style hashes or are 
there more obscure differences?

Does this project make any effort to support such clients and potentially relay 
calls from a WebRTC client to a Microsoft-style client?

Original issue reported on code.google.com by [email protected] on 6 Jun 2013 at 2:24

[GoogleCodeExporter]

[deleted comment]

[GoogleCodeExporter]

Daniel. the Miscrosoft TURN is based upon early TURN drafts. It very 
significantly differs from the officially released RFC 5766. As everything from 
Miscrosoft, this is their own proprietary implementation not compatible with I 
guess anything else. We can make an investigation how difficult would be to add 
compatibility to their TURN. 

This issue is similar to issue 27 (obsolete STUN RFC), but this one is worse, 
because this is even not RFC - this is just an early draft, plus Microsoft's 
own additions.

I also did not like the wording in the Miscosoft docs - it appears that a 
program compatible with their TURN specs would be illegal and they may sue. But 
I am not a lawyer. But I do not want any legal troubles.

Original comment by [email protected] on 6 Jun 2013 at 2:57

[GoogleCodeExporter]

Honestly, I did not get why MS would use "TURN" at all. The whole purpose of 
TURN is a universal standard traffic relay solution. If you are designing a 
proprietary tool, why the heck you would use "TURN" ? You can design a cleaner 
simpler solution for your proprietary requirements. What MS did they combined 
the worst of two words - proprietary and public. They took early ugly TURN 
draft and added some MS_* attributes and then they require a license to use 
those attributes. That is all so screwed up.

Original comment by [email protected] on 6 Jun 2013 at 5:15

[GoogleCodeExporter]

Original comment by [email protected] on 6 Jun 2013 at 5:16