IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [bfcpbis] TBD issue #2: Discuss usage of RFC 5018 mechanisms

"Charles Eckel (eckelcu)" <eckelcu@cisco.com> Thu, 13 December 2012 16:30 UTC

Return-Path: <eckelcu@cisco.com>
X-Original-To: bfcpbis@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: bfcpbis@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7BBF821F8A32 for <bfcpbis@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 13 Dec 2012 08:30:42 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -10.599
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-10.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-8]
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 v1FFUY90A4qp for <bfcpbis@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 13 Dec 2012 08:30:42 -0800 (PST)
Received: from rcdn-iport-8.cisco.com (rcdn-iport-8.cisco.com [173.37.86.79]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id AE59B21F85D2 for <bfcpbis@ietf.org>; Thu, 13 Dec 2012 08:30:41 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=@cisco.com; l=2748; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1355416241; x=1356625841; h=from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:references: in-reply-to:content-transfer-encoding:mime-version; bh=HTsxi6uT2JL8fA4PkLDWttmy0w7Kr2KEhTPI7oqgAJM=; b=egCF2bWUF7xPi5BAuH/8e8Ru4QDtssibLZtqTVJiu28M6G0xrSTdYqYN L7nH6u3nLDJw29EdnTepKlSiNW6O8kPg/Qa810+ebI2myr2nHD+YNu5cw 0+aTyOqpiK90HAkuuGjt8htO+qhCTxfUHrYbPGHnGUOOn980l+9Wk4sZd E=;
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: AgAFAAsCylCtJXHB/2dsb2JhbABFvm4Wc4IeAQEFAQE4LgYLDAQCAQgRBAEBAQoUCQcnCxQJCAIEAQ0NiAu9MwSMV4NiYQOmUYJzgiI
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.84,274,1355097600"; d="scan'208";a="152615813"
Received: from rcdn-core2-6.cisco.com ([173.37.113.193]) by rcdn-iport-8.cisco.com with ESMTP; 13 Dec 2012 16:27:07 +0000
Received: from xhc-aln-x12.cisco.com (xhc-aln-x12.cisco.com [173.36.12.86]) by rcdn-core2-6.cisco.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id qBDGR1bi032048 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=FAIL); Thu, 13 Dec 2012 16:27:05 GMT
Received: from xmb-aln-x08.cisco.com ([169.254.3.169]) by xhc-aln-x12.cisco.com ([173.36.12.86]) with mapi id 14.02.0318.004; Thu, 13 Dec 2012 10:27:01 -0600
From: "Charles Eckel (eckelcu)" <eckelcu@cisco.com>
To: "Tom Kristensen (tomkrist)" <tomkrist@cisco.com>, Gonzalo Camarillo <Gonzalo.Camarillo@ericsson.com>
Thread-Topic: [bfcpbis] TBD issue #2: Discuss usage of RFC 5018 mechanisms
Thread-Index: AQHNwXiY8xN0HLrzVUCNBFRrBps9xpfn1AmAgCxqZACAAtvdQA==
Date: Thu, 13 Dec 2012 16:27:01 +0000
Message-ID: <92B7E61ADAC1BB4F941F943788C08828046EB38C@xmb-aln-x08.cisco.com>
References: <50A2042A.90805@cisco.com> <50A2053F.1050708@ericsson.com> <50C7476C.2000403@cisco.com>
In-Reply-To: <50C7476C.2000403@cisco.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-originating-ip: [10.154.128.80]
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
Cc: BFCPbis WG <bfcpbis@ietf.org>, 'Tom Kristensen' <2mkristensen@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [bfcpbis] TBD issue #2: Discuss usage of RFC 5018 mechanisms
X-BeenThere: bfcpbis@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: BFCPBIS working group discussion list <bfcpbis.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/bfcpbis>, <mailto:bfcpbis-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/bfcpbis>
List-Post: <mailto:bfcpbis@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:bfcpbis-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/bfcpbis>, <mailto:bfcpbis-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 13 Dec 2012 16:30:42 -0000

Sounds good.

Cheers,
Charles (as an individual)

> -----Original Message-----
> From: bfcpbis-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:bfcpbis-bounces@ietf.org] On
> Behalf Of Tom Kristensen (tomkrist)
> Sent: Tuesday, December 11, 2012 6:47 AM
> To: Gonzalo Camarillo
> Cc: BFCPbis WG; 'Tom Kristensen'
> Subject: Re: [bfcpbis] TBD issue #2: Discuss usage of RFC 5018 mechanisms
> 
> Adding something along these lines at the end of Section  might be what
> is needed:
> 
> ----
>      "RFC 5018 specifies how to establish a TCP connection to a floor
> control server outside the context of an offer/answer exchange. When
> using UDP the same set of data is needed for a BFCP connection as listed
> in RFC 5018, Section 3, i.e. transport address of the server, the
> conference identifier, and the user identifier. The procedures and
> considerations for resolving a host name into an IP address also applies
> to BFCP over an unreliable transport. In RFC 5018, Section 4 applies,
> but when using BFCP over an unreliable transport the floor control
> server that receives a BFCP message over UDP (no DTLS) SHOULD request
> the use of DTLS by generating an Error message with an Error code with a
> value of 11 (Use DTLS). The recommendations for authentication in RFC
> 5018, Section 5 and the security considerations in Section 6 also
> applies when an unreliable transport is used, both for certificate-based
> server authentication and for client authentication based on a
> pre-shared secret."
> ----
> 
> Fine with this? Something to clarify or expand upon?
> 
> -- Tom
> 
> On 11/13/2012 09:30 AM, Gonzalo Camarillo wrote:
> > Hi Tom,
> >
> > yes, per my original comments, I believe the spec needs to include a
> > discussion about what happens when the mechanism in RFC 5018 is used.
> >
> > Thanks,
> >
> > Gonzalo
> >
> > On 13/11/2012 10:26 AM, Tom Kristensen wrote:
> >
> >> An issue that needs further work, if a discussion of RFC 5018 usage is
> >> needed of course.
> >>
> >> Gonzalo:
> >>
> >>> Section 6 says:
> >>>
> >>> "(e.g., using an SDP offer/answer exchange [7])"
> >>>
> >>> We should also add a reference to RFC 5018. Additionally, the document
> >>> could discuss at some point what happens when the mechanism in RFC
> >>> 5018 is used.
> >>>
> >> Tom:
> >> | Reference to RFC 5018 added in upcoming version.
> >> | Text discussing impact of using the  RFC 5018 mechanism will be done
> >> | and added as a paragraph of Section 6.1.  Reliable Transport I'd imagine.
> >>
> >> -- Tom
> >>
> >
> >
> 
> _______________________________________________
> bfcpbis mailing list
> bfcpbis@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/bfcpbis

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email