Re: [AVTCORE] Last question about AVP profiles for RTP over QUIC (was: Re: Registering AVP Profiles for RTP over QUIC)

Roman Shpount <roman@telurix.com> Wed, 27 July 2022 21:50 UTC

Return-Path: <roman@telurix.com>
X-Original-To: avt@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: avt@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9B8A2C14F74B for <avt@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 27 Jul 2022 14:50:16 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.105
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.105 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_BLOCKED=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE=-0.01, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001, URIBL_DBL_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, URIBL_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=telurix.com
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([50.223.129.194]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 7xWvY6AgQLNx for <avt@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 27 Jul 2022 14:50:13 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-qv1-xf30.google.com (mail-qv1-xf30.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::f30]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 (128/128 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 07B0BC14F692 for <avt@ietf.org>; Wed, 27 Jul 2022 14:50:12 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-qv1-xf30.google.com with SMTP id b11so151494qvo.11 for <avt@ietf.org>; Wed, 27 Jul 2022 14:50:12 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=telurix.com; s=google; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=Rikr3/OR2dMMoPrdqrWMpx3yWL3GxzxtVdXXQERGtwQ=; b=pn2HJHkzf8ANC0PmmmOMrEOVW52aj7z9m1AZbBCpjWAIzdleKOXNA4BuXkf09g7spP HCwbDdAcG/yG+RkYVOJXz17N1YJyKimXYZRG4sayZbE3wtkynvuYeukQTygA52iuES/M i5ZNcX7ET4Z3C8r9XzC8AiBO4DRHE+letUoxk=
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=Rikr3/OR2dMMoPrdqrWMpx3yWL3GxzxtVdXXQERGtwQ=; b=up/l0LMyw4/f3IKpoHDGpSMZcZsVg4bFhJ1gjqQNbiWEneMq/jA5b+x+eaJO4Erh7I dosquiKCtDsCHprucVoQPefvzNIsZix7zaS6Cdgoq4HnwMUeAGICDNGj3m9K2HE4Uve1 rK/TMX2OqUuB9XWByZSWoBl3TfJqMEII7YFjSl/vqQxhdieebDV/8GhZK0lF8OKZ7QOm VDbr6jcateVj4I7Yn6YsFdO/ynYKoINmDqbpGgCfEgghh3BveWWStWyj4jxOlSyCuuVz 3jPtSd1wgp8nrlnv2BWY3QvKWd9DnQ2RjKOxVhBE8Q4IULa/pwBnQ7HWOxBq2UffBkcJ FPgw==
X-Gm-Message-State: AJIora8Kvu5q7Ovi4HRX48sT06VhMU/NqMLB+aR60hluK5mt6iEfChiY Cadbx2GfTf1Uc2beVHr9hFPj3AOrcvvkEg==
X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGRyM1swZ/F11bFsTcLUo6M8taI1QappZblvZQ15jEUxkIIO89692dgg+U3qXvus00i6ja65Wbfh7w==
X-Received: by 2002:a0c:c506:0:b0:470:8e86:de0 with SMTP id x6-20020a0cc506000000b004708e860de0mr20586116qvi.104.1658958610455; Wed, 27 Jul 2022 14:50:10 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-yw1-f172.google.com (mail-yw1-f172.google.com. [209.85.128.172]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id j10-20020a05620a288a00b006b66c75f01asm4111869qkp.112.2022.07.27.14.50.09 for <avt@ietf.org> (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 bits=128/128); Wed, 27 Jul 2022 14:50:09 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-yw1-f172.google.com with SMTP id 00721157ae682-32194238c77so1155737b3.4 for <avt@ietf.org>; Wed, 27 Jul 2022 14:50:09 -0700 (PDT)
X-Received: by 2002:a0d:fac1:0:b0:31f:6322:a342 with SMTP id k184-20020a0dfac1000000b0031f6322a342mr4116359ywf.222.1658958608774; Wed, 27 Jul 2022 14:50:08 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <CAKKJt-dvotzuaK66T8WQd7YgNLNr_6vqa4W8-z=5FvujpGWA=A@mail.gmail.com> <CAKKJt-c+PrYeackVCyGOpoiPGw6f90D7fZYw+D9MGPNKdEC8cA@mail.gmail.com> <CAD5OKxvVK5WRRY_UQsbnHA2TF9Qd0sNfKcdmuQhCFsFMOr83zA@mail.gmail.com> <CAKKJt-dXF6rLEGBPqTo-q6MwPC8gJ1mKG=ADMXrD86eG-2Q4Og@mail.gmail.com> <CAD5OKxvkWB-xcYDCtuOTq0_um-4UA=3wHphYDwJnE8T9mettfQ@mail.gmail.com> <CAD5OKxtTX1+xmeinU3H6EQ6H-ja3fk-=X+wvMZrx+mQ96JkXWw@mail.gmail.com> <CAKKJt-cyRhANo_J35TyRA0+YouNZ7MGTLSvzv=75maGUYwJLnw@mail.gmail.com> <CAD5OKxvf2NZPF+PGR9u0rcijncuSCprrrciQMwJE3qr_9fBpDg@mail.gmail.com> <CAKKJt-fvD=AQMJT13Ndx4+kQPbE6J0sniCbBvgL10UzDH5=Rug@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAKKJt-fvD=AQMJT13Ndx4+kQPbE6J0sniCbBvgL10UzDH5=Rug@mail.gmail.com>
From: Roman Shpount <roman@telurix.com>
Date: Wed, 27 Jul 2022 17:49:57 -0400
X-Gmail-Original-Message-ID: <CAD5OKxsFJWYLR0HBqNzHdiGJfLbsLdydgUJH4KOYJ_2Cx=Jbww@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CAD5OKxsFJWYLR0HBqNzHdiGJfLbsLdydgUJH4KOYJ_2Cx=Jbww@mail.gmail.com>
To: Spencer Dawkins at IETF <spencerdawkins.ietf@gmail.com>
Cc: IETF AVTCore WG <avt@ietf.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="00000000000092bde105e4d066c9"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/avt/_CVBUXZzU2nIu0xwdSJ0jvsuZio>
Subject: Re: [AVTCORE] Last question about AVP profiles for RTP over QUIC (was: Re: Registering AVP Profiles for RTP over QUIC)
X-BeenThere: avt@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.39
Precedence: list
List-Id: Audio/Video Transport Core Maintenance <avt.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/avt>, <mailto:avt-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/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: Wed, 27 Jul 2022 21:50:16 -0000

Hi Spencer,

My name is misspelled in the presentation (s/Shpout/Shpount) :)

The alternative to ICE TCP candidates is relay over TCP or TLS (TURN). Even
if we decide not to support ICE-TCP, if ICE is supported, RTP-over-QUIC
will be transported over TCP or TLS relay in some cases.

My main point is that ICE-TCP is part of ICE infrastructure and typically a
part of all major ICE implementations. ICE-TCP solves a major problem with
blocked UDP and seamlessly adapts UDP-based protocol to work over TCP.
Disallowing ICE-TCP for RTP-over-QUIC would require extra work to disable
it in the ICE library. It is possible that a better solution for blocked
UDP can be developed for RTP-over-QUIC, but this would require changes to
ICE specifications and implementations.

To summarize, unless we plan to redesign, modify, or disable ICE for
RTP-over-QUIC, ICE-TCP will need to be supported.
_____________
Roman Shpount


On Wed, Jul 27, 2022 at 3:23 PM Spencer Dawkins at IETF <
spencerdawkins.ietf@gmail.com> wrote:

> Hi, Roman,
>
> On Tue, Jul 26, 2022 at 11:39 PM Roman Shpount <roman@telurix.com> wrote:
>
>> Hi Spencer,
>>
>> I am participating remotely, but let me know when the slides are ready.
>>
>
> I finished my slides yesterday evening, and I just checked that they're in
> the datatracker now.
>
> URL is
> https://datatracker.ietf.org/meeting/114/materials/slides-114-avtcore-ietf-114-avtcore-slides-09.pdf
> for combined slideset, and my topic starts on slide 47, immediately
> following the RTP over QUIC slides.
>
> Thank you for being willing to take a look!
>
> Best,
>
> Spencer
>
>>