IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Ice] [MMUSIC] Adam Roach's Discuss on draft-ietf-mmusic-trickle-ice-sip-14: (with DISCUSS and COMMENT)

Roman Shpount <roman@telurix.com> Wed, 04 April 2018 17:06 UTC

Return-Path: <roman@telurix.com>
X-Original-To: ice@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ice@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6A5D9129C6D for <ice@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 4 Apr 2018 10:06:06 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.889
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.889 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_NONE=-0.0001, T_SPF_PERMERROR=0.01] 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 vATPfHzaZ6LJ for <ice@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 4 Apr 2018 10:06:05 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-pl0-x235.google.com (mail-pl0-x235.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400e:c01::235]) (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 41CEB127978 for <ice@ietf.org>; Wed, 4 Apr 2018 10:05:56 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-pl0-x235.google.com with SMTP id 59-v6so12212279plc.13 for <ice@ietf.org>; Wed, 04 Apr 2018 10:05:56 -0700 (PDT)
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=C6loMDHa8scYgqYof7mziGVsZau/p22LZWGmKOM1gOI=; b=TFTK2+ap0548gFGpjVT+s7j/8rLM+K/7SST/b2+aKn1NbF7Fc+xPV4OYqRPeNYdyhx AEuZbHkauKK+AQ9UjOBFEUv1Dflq7eCrb5J0Jbi0aRWAmQM4DlPg5ns1OCCkdjYQSTPz D0kVA3HgscF7RakPY4z9horgDkDdAS4ceaf+F7lHRC3M+94yAfwiAV4Lo7ZkdSCKbhAS hdukphl83Jyezd2cTac/zgtcRrKVjn+ApngAVAR43bY8XvvvdfE2cSKJnLww+EUczatX 9KcNAInsQ1hjQ6fJ65VGKfKz36ygh3YhXGFLogsnyiuQur6+BqgiKClV8+GlSW2ndaTs FKGQ==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=C6loMDHa8scYgqYof7mziGVsZau/p22LZWGmKOM1gOI=; b=PtqQAft1n1hxttnkY+TKv2tv+cDUVqN4OAVAVVrXXdy+JIVMGhmEZo6hJ8m6I553P2 wK+ltWzqZQDCmrSqvaM7a3NIkifRGxAvSsldTihgH4bEq492xc64r9kXZ+DwL5a+Lbif Xp4ll4bcgrW8rKKFfazL/6yI2u0zqbuYFQpBJuPuCrhdOMjHqZrj9K1GDvG4dRhmBZGZ 5Iwid9d+5RtNm17Li7l+r8MDp+mWtQySbW4OFm331JiX6Z8LEaloZvIgiGNpFgEdQ4M9 ovH5zM/I/NGRGj6SK72fMqdqZT4HJ2gEsZNy28mxXP8CAeYRTTKa1wym5SfuWxgiEouc zXsg==
X-Gm-Message-State: AElRT7Gvwkqs3RTtEdsvPoi2lQyCMtxArcORLRfzGavmlOCWDwKbiuWQ FHA+vXPL39q0IE4WnlEur8CTyg==
X-Google-Smtp-Source: AIpwx48j9yQmvKSfN3T72wPsoZZZHlUi8xtnMgQMXzrCYJhFAZcyswcz4uTlx7OMQsZ89JFcZjE5OQ==
X-Received: by 10.99.114.1 with SMTP id n1mr12510209pgc.107.1522861555922; Wed, 04 Apr 2018 10:05:55 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-pl0-f48.google.com (mail-pl0-f48.google.com. [209.85.160.48]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id w17sm4209785pfa.125.2018.04.04.10.05.54 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Wed, 04 Apr 2018 10:05:55 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-pl0-f48.google.com with SMTP id c21-v6so11297593plz.10; Wed, 04 Apr 2018 10:05:54 -0700 (PDT)
X-Received: by 2002:a17:902:7185:: with SMTP id b5-v6mr19348304pll.221.1522861554782; Wed, 04 Apr 2018 10:05:54 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.100.185.79 with HTTP; Wed, 4 Apr 2018 10:05:54 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <2B936029-9DC7-491C-893F-AE6D05723E4B@cisco.com>
References: <152274059303.13991.7963954297164952826.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> <abc6dbc9-5500-bf51-c003-c4d9affe612f@mozilla.com> <E24F839C-DC79-41DA-8742-33F2EB9634BC@nostrum.com> <ba4a3f03-9180-4b30-c672-b893fc19d241@nostrum.com> <CABcZeBPQ32XX1j1a0VCuytC+mv9b7Gv_uNK5kbufPfOMGxPw-A@mail.gmail.com> <CAD5OKxsWkCb=yE7D=-9uyO1Q8rx9R4uWMLOWRTLR72_GAkdNKg@mail.gmail.com> <CABcZeBMwmisiM0Vpc9Pr53wOPi=J6RAKiNiO8JEkPOtcTjOZvA@mail.gmail.com> <2B936029-9DC7-491C-893F-AE6D05723E4B@cisco.com>
From: Roman Shpount <roman@telurix.com>
Date: Wed, 04 Apr 2018 13:05:54 -0400
X-Gmail-Original-Message-ID: <CAD5OKxvzzTK0gu1VY=d3XPLW117ffDmX1mAOJFRFhO_-F-e=4w@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CAD5OKxvzzTK0gu1VY=d3XPLW117ffDmX1mAOJFRFhO_-F-e=4w@mail.gmail.com>
To: "Cullen Jennings (fluffy)" <fluffy@cisco.com>
Cc: Eric Rescorla <ekr@rtfm.com>, Ben Campbell <ben@nostrum.com>, Adam Roach <adam@nostrum.com>, mmusic WG <mmusic@ietf.org>, "mmusic-chairs@ietf.org" <mmusic-chairs@ietf.org>, "ice@ietf.org" <ice@ietf.org>, "Flemming Andreasen (fandreas)" <fandreas@cisco.com>, RTCWeb IETF <rtcweb@ietf.org>, The IESG <iesg@ietf.org>, "draft-ietf-mmusic-trickle-ice-sip@ietf.org" <draft-ietf-mmusic-trickle-ice-sip@ietf.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="00000000000003d981056908d6c2"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ice/OjAiHrTTa8fbgNnsU0QPEMIJp6g>
X-Mailman-Approved-At: Wed, 04 Apr 2018 11:45:16 -0700
Subject: Re: [Ice] [MMUSIC] Adam Roach's Discuss on draft-ietf-mmusic-trickle-ice-sip-14: (with DISCUSS and COMMENT)
X-BeenThere: ice@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
Precedence: list
List-Id: "Interactive Connectivity Establishment \(ICE\)" <ice.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/ice>, <mailto:ice-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/ice/>
List-Post: <mailto:ice@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ice-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ice>, <mailto:ice-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 04 Apr 2018 17:06:06 -0000

On Wed, Apr 4, 2018 at 12:47 PM, Cullen Jennings (fluffy) <fluffy@cisco.com>
wrote:

>
> On Apr 3, 2018, at 11:43 AM, Eric Rescorla <ekr@rtfm.com> wrote:
>
> I want to do whatever is necessary to remove the normative dependency from
> JSEP to SIP
>
>
> I think a big part of the RTCWeb/WebRTC community would strongly object to
> JSEP normatively depending on SIP.
>

Do you have any issues with dependency on RFC5245 and the portion of it
which went into draft-mmusic-ice-sip-sdp? Both define SIP procedures in
addition to offer/answer. We are kind of dealing with the same thing here.
Other drafts, like mmusic-dtls-sdp have SIP consideration sections in them.
It did not seem to cause any issues either.

As I have mentioned earlier, I think,  trickle-ice-sip should internally
clearly identify generic offer/answer SDP procedures and SIP specific
considerations. Once it is done it would be no different then all the other
offer/answer drafts we put together recently.
_____________
Roman Shpount

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email