Re: [MEDIACTRL] <encryption> support

"Roni Even" <> Wed, 19 December 2012 13:08 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 52A5421F86F0 for <>; Wed, 19 Dec 2012 05:08:31 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -3.599
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.000, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1]
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id XwWWT5xRtARN for <>; Wed, 19 Dec 2012 05:08:30 -0800 (PST)
Received: from ( []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 744F221F8696 for <>; Wed, 19 Dec 2012 05:08:30 -0800 (PST)
Received: by with SMTP id d49so1040294eek.32 for <>; Wed, 19 Dec 2012 05:08:29 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=20120113; h=x-received:from:to:references:in-reply-to:subject:date:message-id :mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:x-mailer :thread-index:content-language; bh=uv/ecAp3LiTHc2iZBBU7hfVWLWLXiKu0Zoaygln871k=; b=z3ireD4hYlEmQMy8+a6yzChgGpXn72RstI6viEPSCEBzCRYG4kKCjfAPJ7XcgYzfRh ELom+lXKmGr++SJ90zo4hE53Lej1wvaIadEO7AH6cn6teCRLZz8VBgAsQ0V/5YeZgxpU mjfv7ZR8IUw9aR88pISWXXSTAnZKAOD9MVgJTtb8fcx8o3tMnzBQfxBOCPy2qlEJI77Y 1Ip8D5BQBl36S0X+cTAXKbOw11SbTWyiEahpdlo3noZauW350QVm2u8M9hqnbb1Yp/OV M7nhZ7f9llCeggOtNm/pHIHXqhny6cvwz/RUr7vbp9jZ01qnntKtTLCPUpltyUqjMWv0 umuw==
X-Received: by with SMTP id 43mr14194802eed.31.1355922509509; Wed, 19 Dec 2012 05:08:29 -0800 (PST)
Received: from RoniE ( []) by with ESMTPS id v46sm9166025eep.1.2012. (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=OTHER); Wed, 19 Dec 2012 05:08:26 -0800 (PST)
From: "Roni Even" <>
To: "'Eric Burger'" <>, <>
References: <>
In-Reply-To: <>
Date: Wed, 19 Dec 2012 15:05:39 +0200
Message-ID: <03ec01cddde9$8ddf6a00$a99e3e00$>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 14.0
Thread-Index: AQLd1kKwiExmI4d6sQqJgvzoitKCu5YAJG8A
Content-Language: en-us
Subject: Re: [MEDIACTRL] <encryption> support
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: Media Control WG Discussion List <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 19 Dec 2012 13:08:31 -0000

I am not happy and would have liked to see also SDES maybe define two values
for the <encryption> element. Note that encryption is specified also in
other sections for the client and mixer so the definition should be
The IMTC defined a security profile for video conference end points with
both SDES (used by current systems) and DTLS for new systems.
I will not object  to just having DTLS.

-----Original Message-----
From: [] On
Behalf Of Eric Burger
Sent: 13 December, 2012 11:55 PM
Subject: [MEDIACTRL] <encryption> support

Section of describes an
indicator, <encryption>, as to whether or not a Media Server supports SRTP.

We were thinking there could be some opaque string that would describe the
keying mechanism.  However, as numerous ADs have pointed out, there is no
IANA registry for such mechanisms.

I would offer we be pragmatic, and I would like to hear from manufacturers
principally but others with skin in the game. Specifically, what if we said
there is one and only one official, supported keying mechanism, namely
DTLS-SRTP?  While it is true that today most SIP SRTP implementations are
SDES, the user community is demanding a move to DTLS-SRTP and DTLS-SRTP will
also be the only keying mechanism for RTCWEB.

So, the proposed text would be:  <encryption>

   The <encryption> element allows a Media Server to declare support for
   encrypting RTP media streams using RFC 3711 [RFC3711].  The element
   MAY be present.  If the element is present, then the Media Server
   DTLS-SRTP [RFC 5763].

   The <encryption> element has no attributes.

Anyone want to see something different?