Re: [bfcpbis] [MMUSIC] m= line protocol in case of ICE

Roman Shpount <roman@telurix.com> Tue, 29 November 2016 18:38 UTC

Return-Path: <roman@telurix.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 6BB1C129C2B for <bfcpbis@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 29 Nov 2016 10:38:33 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.599
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7] autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=telurix-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id n6zVCsQrJCsA for <bfcpbis@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 29 Nov 2016 10:38:31 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-qt0-x230.google.com (mail-qt0-x230.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400d:c0d::230]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 35C16129C24 for <bfcpbis@ietf.org>; Tue, 29 Nov 2016 10:38:31 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-qt0-x230.google.com with SMTP id w33so164154539qtc.3 for <bfcpbis@ietf.org>; Tue, 29 Nov 2016 10:38:31 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=telurix-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=7qqLdS9vp6TTnjBbwJmv7u7xqixov4ZHULXOeKEcOFA=; b=jl2/umngtMNHaMlYI4g/ALsYOy0W0AUY2p0/tXXFZZ2QEc78HJuWgJ2QwOx8AE6mFn xFNlX9N++I0rQNo7XiCwmYuSPKn6tqZxFXiSvXbO3qe4BMjNvsjBaQ3P424aUMtrFJxs 0MTEIlYgz9q/p0SHe1mhss9BroWwOmVOvS53HR42sKmDP0RjmuTjofKFUou1Ko+LLQVc jQNUhRgitUm+LzLoDUsAvK1wsHK+ReSgkCToY8o7SPQabeDZYiDL+qLlIl+/HgmUnEym 24f4sINwlbAVTUBCrHqHY4xBhN1aOaep4jAJ+Ol4v/gdTTO4l7T+wTInC7lTTg7IQwzB D/fQ==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=7qqLdS9vp6TTnjBbwJmv7u7xqixov4ZHULXOeKEcOFA=; b=eJ2fPHLqgGjL3tQCJiNSiIT44WxRU3Ij3XO6ZOv9YDwyMdRBft0TDIy2rovS+fbMTF 7POB3P/URNRH+oGTvsIyoAedigjz2ZQvwKJSloFomN/o/wLKbbJMfhkgjGELwXCN9Iq3 fQ2+bi4VDdsRDLeyEKiylmifVq7aohNJL0ce3lXe2+cWk5ie6hl5gjSFN/2ZW5Exglcv 5432EBJKPQfSuNdSKD7SvIYO+ybjpGdeTG8FB2t3rf1YsbNo2EUhzuJl1kAonNK6rYJS wzrgX/WwSD56MyjHcuSY/As++OPpxEK5SomvNumShicYdNmuE8stxF9wW3q0II8XP90g /QYw==
X-Gm-Message-State: AKaTC01eo3cZHUMzHA7nXGPFXmNKHav/Qd1DWusjURzmLHU6u/RuZk/x2iPxiMsis2O9Jw==
X-Received: by 10.237.47.227 with SMTP id m90mr25673550qtd.120.1480444710349; Tue, 29 Nov 2016 10:38:30 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-qk0-f169.google.com (mail-qk0-f169.google.com. [209.85.220.169]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id r15sm31476683qte.9.2016.11.29.10.38.29 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Tue, 29 Nov 2016 10:38:29 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-qk0-f169.google.com with SMTP id n21so184167373qka.3; Tue, 29 Nov 2016 10:38:29 -0800 (PST)
X-Received: by 10.55.197.6 with SMTP id p6mr27881287qki.239.1480444709772; Tue, 29 Nov 2016 10:38:29 -0800 (PST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.12.145.205 with HTTP; Tue, 29 Nov 2016 10:38:29 -0800 (PST)
In-Reply-To: <D0210B5A-138A-4C86-8D14-6E1FEC011E33@cisco.com>
References: <CAD5OKxuhvCz82+7JK8QrArtrYcjV9+b7vWMpWRnCjNbrL++srA@mail.gmail.com> <7594FB04B1934943A5C02806D1A2204B4BE3AE83@ESESSMB209.ericsson.se> <CAD5OKxu15YgYO0xyWMYXv7VTAVVQ71iJhH_txt31BV0CvCSjqg@mail.gmail.com> <F96AC385-2721-4652-98F5-1BF92F06214A@gmail.com> <D0210B5A-138A-4C86-8D14-6E1FEC011E33@cisco.com>
From: Roman Shpount <roman@telurix.com>
Date: Tue, 29 Nov 2016 13:38:29 -0500
X-Gmail-Original-Message-ID: <CAD5OKxuzpVRsR0cMeUyhe35sA9W6bL=p1=0RUpTqwpQDyinwDA@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CAD5OKxuzpVRsR0cMeUyhe35sA9W6bL=p1=0RUpTqwpQDyinwDA@mail.gmail.com>
To: "Charles Eckel (eckelcu)" <eckelcu@cisco.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001a1149a18c092c8e054274e565
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/bfcpbis/NnSWQ-zS-JkHFSGg2yA042U8yDA>
Cc: "ice@ietf.org" <ice@ietf.org>, "bfcpbis@ietf.org" <bfcpbis@ietf.org>, Christer Holmberg <christer.holmberg@ericsson.com>, "mmusic@ietf.org" <mmusic@ietf.org>, Alan Ford <alan.ford@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [bfcpbis] [MMUSIC] m= line protocol in case of ICE
X-BeenThere: bfcpbis@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17
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: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/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: Tue, 29 Nov 2016 18:38:33 -0000

On Tue, Nov 29, 2016 at 12:48 PM, Charles Eckel (eckelcu) <eckelcu@cisco.com
> wrote:

> It seems to me that the most straightforward approach would be to mandate
> support for BFCP over UDP when using ICE, use UDP as the default candidate,
> and signal the BFCP m-line as if it is BFCP over UDP. If we can mandate the
> use of DTLS, that would be even better.
>
> Thoughts?
>
>
>

I agree.

The only issue that I still have, if DTLS is not used, what protocol is
used when ICE tcp candidate is selected for transport. Is this TCP/BFCP
(which goes against RFC6544)  or is it UDP/BFCP with RFC4571 framing? If it
is UDP/BFCP with RFC4571 framing, what transport tag should be used in the
re-INVITE which is sent after ICE nomination with only selected candidate?
Should it be TCP/UDP/BFCP or something similar?

Regards,
_____________
Roman Shpount