[AVTCORE] I-D Action: draft-ietf-avt-srtp-not-mandatory-10.txt
internet-drafts@ietf.org Mon, 22 October 2012 11:40 UTC
Return-Path: <internet-drafts@ietf.org>
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 741B221F8BC8; Mon, 22 Oct 2012 04:40:35 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -102.532
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.532 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.067, BAYES_00=-2.599, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id pX5eTTn1U6Ck; Mon, 22 Oct 2012 04:40:34 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ietfa.amsl.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id CF8E621F8BC0; Mon, 22 Oct 2012 04:40:34 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
From: internet-drafts@ietf.org
To: i-d-announce@ietf.org
X-Test-IDTracker: no
X-IETF-IDTracker: 4.34
Message-ID: <20121022114034.11909.84117.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com>
Date: Mon, 22 Oct 2012 04:40:34 -0700
Cc: avt@ietf.org
Subject: [AVTCORE] I-D Action: draft-ietf-avt-srtp-not-mandatory-10.txt
X-BeenThere: avt@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
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: <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: Mon, 22 Oct 2012 11:40:35 -0000
A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts directories.
This draft is a work item of the Audio/Video Transport Core Maintenance Working Group of the IETF.
Title : Securing the RTP Protocol Framework: Why RTP Does Not Mandate a Single Media Security Solution
Author(s) : Colin Perkins
Magnus Westerlund
Filename : draft-ietf-avt-srtp-not-mandatory-10.txt
Pages : 9
Date : 2012-10-22
Abstract:
This memo discusses the problem of securing real-time multimedia
sessions, and explains why the Real-time Transport Protocol (RTP),
and the associated RTP control protocol (RTCP), do not mandate a
single media security mechanism. Guidelines for designers and
reviewers of future RTP extensions are provided, to ensure that
appropriate security mechanisms are mandated, and that any such
mechanisms are specified in a manner that conforms with the RTP
architecture.
The IETF datatracker status page for this draft is:
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-avt-srtp-not-mandatory
There's also a htmlized version available at:
http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-avt-srtp-not-mandatory-10
A diff from the previous version is available at:
http://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=draft-ietf-avt-srtp-not-mandatory-10
Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP at:
ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/
- [AVTCORE] I-D Action: draft-ietf-avt-srtp-not-man… internet-drafts