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

Tom Kristensen <tomkrist@cisco.com> Tue, 13 November 2012 08:26 UTC

Return-Path: <tomkrist@cisco.com>
X-Original-To: bfcpbis@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: bfcpbis@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8599D21F88FB for <bfcpbis@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 13 Nov 2012 00:26:30 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -9.799
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-9.799 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.800, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-8]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id SOgdedvnSqB0 for <bfcpbis@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 13 Nov 2012 00:26:30 -0800 (PST)
Received: from ams-iport-3.cisco.com (ams-iport-3.cisco.com []) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B549B21F8857 for <bfcpbis@ietf.org>; Tue, 13 Nov 2012 00:26:29 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=@cisco.com; l=568; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1352795189; x=1354004789; h=message-id:date:from:mime-version:to:cc:subject: content-transfer-encoding; bh=oFd4uSaXm2afX78gHj8OPB4tBsc30y7axPX8yVk2F2s=; b=jX2BiLqvCx+YFmtDT2v3Nf4qeQGYUi3aDlhuGcTV1lIU4j0obAynw0fy 5zqYoY7LsVL/Vr1uLBJGQV0xn72q8R/4os3zcqp+XRmP/5RElYFcccP6S XQZB7mEX0XsrQIfaBs6qOd+kMtUzx3YiHemUJXU5dFYYImJXrrrYEyGvF 0=;
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: Ak4JAG4DolCQ/khL/2dsb2JhbABEwm4EBH2BCII3ASVBPDQCTA0BBwEBHodomiSPZZA4knUDlXyFa4htgWuCcA
X-IronPort-AV: E=McAfee;i="5400,1158,6894"; a="9526185"
Received: from ams-core-2.cisco.com ([]) by ams-iport-3.cisco.com with ESMTP; 13 Nov 2012 08:26:19 +0000
Received: from [] (dhcp-10-54-86-33.cisco.com []) by ams-core-2.cisco.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id qAD8QIet020778; Tue, 13 Nov 2012 08:26:18 GMT
Message-ID: <50A2042A.90805@cisco.com>
Date: Tue, 13 Nov 2012 09:26:18 +0100
From: Tom Kristensen <tomkrist@cisco.com>
Organization: Cisco
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv: Gecko/20101027 Fedora/3.0.10-1.fc12 Lightning/1.0b2pre Thunderbird/3.0.10
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: BFCPbis WG <bfcpbis@ietf.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Cc: Gonzalo Camarillo <Gonzalo.Camarillo@ericsson.com>
Subject: [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: Tue, 13 Nov 2012 08:26:30 -0000

An issue that needs further work, if a discussion of RFC 5018 usage is 
needed of course.

 > 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.

| 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