Re: [MMUSIC] SCTP-SDP: Virtual Connection impact

[Roman Shpount <[e-mail]>]

On Wed, Apr 15, 2015 at 9:32 AM, Simon Perreault <[e-mail]>
wrote:

> Le 2015-04-15 04:22, Christer Holmberg a écrit :
> >>From my personal point of view, DTLS in combination with ICE is a design
> mess. It would be much cleaner and strategic if instead two separate
> protocols this was a single protocol which was responsible for
> authentication, encryption negotiation, connection path discovery, path
> updates, and communication >consent. These are closely related tasks and
> ideally they should be handled together instead of one on top of the other.
> >
> > So, what is your suggestion? :)
>
> I feel Christer's pain. This has been discussed to death. We have
> reached the point where it's "text or STFU". I don't care about this
> anymore so I'll STFU.
>

For the sake of history, Christer suggested using connection:new with DTLS
in offer/answer. Paul asked if this is "strategic" enough. I sent the
response that strategic solution would be to fix DTLS/ICE combo and make it
a single multi-path secure protocol. If needed, I can try to write a draft
for such protocol which combines DTLS and ICE functionality. This is not
the hard part. The hard part is convincing others (primarily browser
vendors) that they should adopt this. So, if anybody is interested in such
new protocol, let me know. Otherwise I would shut up and wait for ICE/DTLS
problems either get resolved or become so bad that the new protocol would
be unavoidable.

Regards,
_____________
Roman Shpount