Re: [AVT] AD review: draft-ietf-srtp-not-mandatory-05
Colin Perkins <csp@csperkins.org> Fri, 14 May 2010 09:34 UTC
Return-Path: <csp@csperkins.org>
X-Original-To: avt@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: avt@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 549FB3A6AA7 for <avt@core3.amsl.com>; Fri, 14 May 2010 02:34:22 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.057
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.057 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-1.058, BAYES_50=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id CKeHwb3-0eXZ for <avt@core3.amsl.com>; Fri, 14 May 2010 02:34:21 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from anchor-msapost-2.mail.demon.net (anchor-msapost-2.mail.demon.net [195.173.77.165]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A3FFD3A68C1 for <avt@ietf.org>; Fri, 14 May 2010 02:33:56 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mangole.dcs.gla.ac.uk ([130.209.247.112]) by anchor-post-2.mail.demon.net with esmtpsa (AUTH csperkins-dwh) (TLSv1:AES128-SHA:128) (Exim 4.69) id 1OCrH8-0005p6-mN; Fri, 14 May 2010 09:33:47 +0000
Message-Id: <2E5CA3FF-CE4F-4B61-BE14-403AD1E09051@csperkins.org>
From: Colin Perkins <csp@csperkins.org>
To: Robert Sparks <rjsparks@nostrum.com>
In-Reply-To: <59936AC7-893D-4ACC-B9FF-410B673B74F6@nostrum.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"; format="flowed"; delsp="yes"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v936)
Date: Fri, 14 May 2010 09:27:04 +0100
References: <59936AC7-893D-4ACC-B9FF-410B673B74F6@nostrum.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.936)
Cc: avt@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [AVT] AD review: draft-ietf-srtp-not-mandatory-05
X-BeenThere: avt@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: Audio/Video Transport Working Group <avt.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/avt>, <mailto:avt-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/avt>
List-Post: <mailto:avt@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:avt-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/avt>, <mailto:avt-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 14 May 2010 09:34:22 -0000
Robert, On 12 May 2010, at 21:45, Robert Sparks wrote: > Summary: This is ready to go into IETF last call (which should be > issued shortly) > > I have some comments/questions - treat these as early last call > comments: > > In the bullet list in section 4, I don't think it is necessary for > this document to speculate on the prevalence of the different > deployment environments. I suggest changing "The most common use > case for RTP is probably" to "A common use case for RTP is" > > Section 4 could be read (through omission) to imply that dtls-srtp > or zrtp are not appropriate for the point-to-point on trusted > infrastructure use case. I don't think that was the intent of the > working group and suggest explicitly mentioning that dtls-srtp or > zrtp would be appropriate for those environments as well. > > Nit: s/unncessary/unnecessary/ Thanks - these are all good suggestions. We'll submit an update to incorporate them once the IETF last call closes. -- Colin Perkins http://csperkins.org/
- [AVT] AD review: draft-ietf-srtp-not-mandatory-05 Robert Sparks
- Re: [AVT] AD review: draft-ietf-srtp-not-mandator… Colin Perkins