IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [AVT] draft-ietf-avt-ports-for-ucast-mcast-rtp-04

"Ali C. Begen (abegen)" <abegen@cisco.com> Wed, 01 December 2010 14:54 UTC

Return-Path: <abegen@cisco.com>
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 97F5F3A6B7C for <avt@core3.amsl.com>; Wed, 1 Dec 2010 06:54:38 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -10.333
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-10.333 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.266, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-8]
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 C3f1smJrSDkV for <avt@core3.amsl.com>; Wed, 1 Dec 2010 06:54:37 -0800 (PST)
Received: from sj-iport-6.cisco.com (sj-iport-6.cisco.com [171.71.176.117]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id AF3A53A6B40 for <avt@ietf.org>; Wed, 1 Dec 2010 06:54:37 -0800 (PST)
Authentication-Results: sj-iport-6.cisco.com; dkim=neutral (message not signed) header.i=none
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: AvsEAFbw9UyrR7Hu/2dsb2JhbACjFHGpAJsghUcEhF6JHg
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.59,283,1288569600"; d="scan'208";a="628904566"
Received: from sj-core-5.cisco.com ([171.71.177.238]) by sj-iport-6.cisco.com with ESMTP; 01 Dec 2010 14:55:51 +0000
Received: from xbh-sjc-231.amer.cisco.com (xbh-sjc-231.cisco.com [128.107.191.100]) by sj-core-5.cisco.com (8.13.8/8.14.3) with ESMTP id oB1EtpbH019639; Wed, 1 Dec 2010 14:55:51 GMT
Received: from xmb-sjc-215.amer.cisco.com ([171.70.151.169]) by xbh-sjc-231.amer.cisco.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.4675); Wed, 1 Dec 2010 06:55:50 -0800
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5
Content-class: urn:content-classes:message
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="Windows-1252"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Date: Wed, 01 Dec 2010 06:55:07 -0800
Message-ID: <04CAD96D4C5A3D48B1919248A8FE0D540DC93820@xmb-sjc-215.amer.cisco.com>
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
Thread-Topic: draft-ietf-avt-ports-for-ucast-mcast-rtp-04
Thread-Index: AcuRZo8n5SLP+sUjTTqvKtzeX69KigAAKgjQ
From: "Ali C. Begen (abegen)" <abegen@cisco.com>
To: "DRAGE, Keith (Keith)" <keith.drage@alcatel-lucent.com>, IETF AVT WG <avt@ietf.org>
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 01 Dec 2010 14:55:50.0925 (UTC) FILETIME=[D872C3D0:01CB9167]
Subject: Re: [AVT] draft-ietf-avt-ports-for-ucast-mcast-rtp-04
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: Wed, 01 Dec 2010 14:54:38 -0000

Keith,

I will let others say their own opinions but see the message from Magnus about the topic you are inquiring about:
http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/avt/current/msg13774.html

The -04 version addressed this. 

Magnus also provided a review for -04 for the whole text (including the security section) and we are trying to close those comments/issues as well.

Thanks.
-acbegen

> -----Original Message-----
> From: avt-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:avt-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of DRAGE, Keith (Keith)
> Sent: Wednesday, December 01, 2010 9:47 AM
> To: 'IETF AVT WG'
> Subject: [AVT] draft-ietf-avt-ports-for-ucast-mcast-rtp-04
> 
> (As WG chair)
> 
> At the AVT face to face meeting in Beijing, there was considerable discussion on the security issues regarding token versus
> cookie.
> 
> My only conclusion from that discussion was that the text needs to be improved, and shortening the timer may provide the
> only real solution to such attacks.
> 
> Has this issue been nailed down and closed in the -04 version of the document, or is more work still required?
> 
> In particular I'd like to see responses from EKR, Magnus and Colin, who all indicated more work was required in Beijing.
> 
> regards
> 
> Keith
> _______________________________________________
> Audio/Video Transport Working Group
> avt@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/avt

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email