Re: [AVTCORE] comments on draft-ietf-avtcore-srtp-encrypted-header-ext-00.txt

Qin Wu <bill.wu@huawei.com> Fri, 15 July 2011 02:20 UTC

Return-Path: <bill.wu@huawei.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 82F2311E8074 for <avt@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 14 Jul 2011 19:20:33 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -5.474
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.474 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=1.125, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4]
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 Bl9Jd6T4Kyfu for <avt@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 14 Jul 2011 19:20:33 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from szxga04-in.huawei.com (szxga04-in.huawei.com [119.145.14.67]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D02F411E8070 for <avt@ietf.org>; Thu, 14 Jul 2011 19:20:32 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from huawei.com (szxga04-in [172.24.2.12]) by szxga04-in.huawei.com (iPlanet Messaging Server 5.2 HotFix 2.14 (built Aug 8 2006)) with ESMTP id <0LOC0098ARU7NH@szxga04-in.huawei.com> for avt@ietf.org; Fri, 15 Jul 2011 10:20:32 +0800 (CST)
Received: from szxrg02-dlp.huawei.com ([172.24.2.119]) by szxga04-in.huawei.com (iPlanet Messaging Server 5.2 HotFix 2.14 (built Aug 8 2006)) with ESMTP id <0LOC000WMRTS1R@szxga04-in.huawei.com> for avt@ietf.org; Fri, 15 Jul 2011 10:20:31 +0800 (CST)
Received: from 172.24.2.119 (EHLO szxeml206-edg.china.huawei.com) ([172.24.2.119]) by szxrg02-dlp.huawei.com (MOS 4.1.9-GA FastPath queued) with ESMTP id ACG09138; Fri, 15 Jul 2011 10:20:31 +0800 (CST)
Received: from SZXEML401-HUB.china.huawei.com (10.82.67.31) by szxeml206-edg.china.huawei.com (172.24.2.58) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.1.270.1; Fri, 15 Jul 2011 10:20:22 +0800
Received: from w53375q (10.138.41.76) by szxeml401-hub.china.huawei.com (10.82.67.31) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.1.270.1; Fri, 15 Jul 2011 10:20:30 +0800
Date: Fri, 15 Jul 2011 10:20:30 +0800
From: Qin Wu <bill.wu@huawei.com>
X-Originating-IP: [10.138.41.76]
To: Jonathan Lennox <jonathan@vidyo.com>
Message-id: <3D4B32970B9340049897AF249D25DE58@china.huawei.com>
MIME-version: 1.0
X-MIMEOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.6109
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.5931
Content-type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-priority: Normal
X-CFilter-Loop: Reflected
References: <20110607084412.16038.596.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> <005801cc406d$9c903090$d5b091b0$%roni@huawei.com> <9E56A50D84704E9EB96FE1EC68445967@china.huawei.com> <58E2C94C-E470-45F2-BC2E-21C929FD221E@vidyo.com>
Cc: avt@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [AVTCORE] comments on draft-ietf-avtcore-srtp-encrypted-header-ext-00.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: Fri, 15 Jul 2011 02:20:33 -0000

Hi,:
The old or new label value is used to calculate the encryption and salting keys that encrypt the either header or payload. 
It seems they should be registered somewhere. However I am not aware of any other SDO or organization use these values.
Anyway, I am okay with your clarification.

Regards!
-Qin
----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Jonathan Lennox" <jonathan@vidyo.com>
To: "Qin Wu" <bill.wu@huawei.com>
Cc: <avt@ietf.org>
Sent: Thursday, July 14, 2011 11:15 PM
Subject: Re: [AVTCORE] comments on draft-ietf-avtcore-srtp-encrypted-header-ext-00.txt


> Hi, Qin --
> 
> My inclination would be that label values are used rarely enough that there doesn't need to be an IANA registry for them -- they should only be allocated by standards action, and coordination is done by the usual working group consensus processes.
> 
> Is there some use case where these values would need to be allocated for non-standards-track purposes, or by working groups other than AVTCore?
> 
> On Jul 14, 2011, at 4:15 AM, Qin Wu wrote:
> 
>> One more comment to draft-ietf-avtcore-srtp-encrypted-header-ext:
>> This draft allocates two new lable value from 0x06 to 0x07 for k_he and k_hs, I am wondering
>> Is there a need in the IANA section to regiserter these values and if yes, who are responsible for regisering
>> thes new values? Does it rely on key management protocol or SRTP protcol or this draft?
> 
> --
> Jonathan Lennox
> jonathan@vidyo.com
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Audio/Video Transport Core Maintenance
> avt@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/avt