[MMUSIC] Review (by Albrecht) of draft-ietf-mmusic-udptl-dtls-02

"Schwarz, Albrecht (Albrecht)" <albrecht.schwarz@alcatel-lucent.com> Wed, 18 December 2013 15:29 UTC

Return-Path: <albrecht.schwarz@alcatel-lucent.com>
X-Original-To: mmusic@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: mmusic@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4EB251AE40F for <mmusic@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 18 Dec 2013 07:29:29 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -5.699
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.699 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, J_CHICKENPOX_56=0.6, J_CHICKENPOX_57=0.6, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5] autolearn=ham
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 b078oGt58ONx for <mmusic@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 18 Dec 2013 07:29:26 -0800 (PST)
Received: from ihemail1.lucent.com (ihemail1.lucent.com [135.245.0.33]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1E42C1AE189 for <mmusic@ietf.org>; Wed, 18 Dec 2013 07:29:26 -0800 (PST)
Received: from fr711usmtp1.zeu.alcatel-lucent.com (h135-239-2-122.lucent.com [135.239.2.122]) by ihemail1.lucent.com (8.13.8/IER-o) with ESMTP id rBIFTMwq018468 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=FAIL) for <mmusic@ietf.org>; Wed, 18 Dec 2013 09:29:23 -0600 (CST)
Received: from FR712WXCHHUB03.zeu.alcatel-lucent.com (fr712wxchhub03.zeu.alcatel-lucent.com [135.239.2.74]) by fr711usmtp1.zeu.alcatel-lucent.com (GMO) with ESMTP id rBIFTLxd027524 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=FAIL) for <mmusic@ietf.org>; Wed, 18 Dec 2013 16:29:21 +0100
Received: from FR711WXCHMBA03.zeu.alcatel-lucent.com ([169.254.3.151]) by FR712WXCHHUB03.zeu.alcatel-lucent.com ([135.239.2.74]) with mapi id 14.02.0247.003; Wed, 18 Dec 2013 16:29:21 +0100
From: "Schwarz, Albrecht (Albrecht)" <albrecht.schwarz@alcatel-lucent.com>
To: "mmusic@ietf.org" <mmusic@ietf.org>
Thread-Topic: Review (by Albrecht) of draft-ietf-mmusic-udptl-dtls-02
Thread-Index: Ac78BetKtAzG5MiCRciuBhIxNigaaw==
Date: Wed, 18 Dec 2013 15:29:20 +0000
Message-ID: <786615F3A85DF44AA2A76164A71FE1AC1230F3@FR711WXCHMBA03.zeu.alcatel-lucent.com>
Accept-Language: de-DE, en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-originating-ip: [135.239.27.38]
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_786615F3A85DF44AA2A76164A71FE1AC1230F3FR711WXCHMBA03zeu_"
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.57 on 135.245.2.33
Subject: [MMUSIC] Review (by Albrecht) of draft-ietf-mmusic-udptl-dtls-02
X-BeenThere: mmusic@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: Multiparty Multimedia Session Control Working Group <mmusic.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/mmusic>, <mailto:mmusic-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/mmusic/>
List-Post: <mailto:mmusic@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:mmusic-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mmusic>, <mailto:mmusic-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 18 Dec 2013 15:29:29 -0000

Dear All,
did a review of the -02 draft version.
The content is technically pretty complete in my opinion.

Like to propose three comments concerning the addition of complementary information, see below.

Regards,
Albrecht


to 3.1<http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-mmusic-udptl-dtls-02#section-3.1>.  Secure Channel Establishment
      Paragraph:

   In addition to the usual contents of an SDP media description ("m="

   line) specified for UDPTL over the UDP, each SDP media description

   for UDPTL over DTLS over the UDP will also contain several SDP

   attributes, as specified in [RFC4145<http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc4145>] and [RFC4572<http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc4572>].

proposed to be detailed by:


   In addition to the usual contents of an SDP media description ("m="

   line) specified for UDPTL over the UDP, each SDP media description

   for UDPTL over DTLS over the UDP will also contain several SDP

   attributes, which were introduced in the context of TCP and TLS (but reused here for DTLS-over-UDP), as specified in [RFC4145<http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc4145>] (TCP) and [RFC4572<http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc4572>] (TLS).


List item:

   o  The endpoint MUST use the SDP setup attribute [RFC4145<http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc4145>].  The

      offerer SHOULD assign the SDP setup attribute with a setup:actpass

      value, and MAY assign the SDP setup attribute with a setup:active

      value or setup:passive value.  The offerer MUST NOT assign the SDP

      setup attribute with a setup:holdconn value.  If the offerer ...

proposed to add further background information:

   o  The endpoint MUST use the SDP setup attribute [RFC4145<http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc4145>].  The

      offerer SHOULD assign the SDP setup attribute with a setup:actpass

      value, and MAY assign the SDP setup attribute with a setup:active

      value or setup:passive value (NOTE: these rules allow to decouple the establishment direction of the DTLS session from the establishment direction of the SIP session (which may be demanded due to security considerations, NAT traversal aspects, etc.)).
The offerer MUST NOT assign the SDP

      setup attribute with a setup:holdconn value.  If the offerer ....


to 3.2<http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-mmusic-udptl-dtls-02#section-3.2>.  Secure Channel Usage

      Paragraph:

   DTLS is used as specified in [RFC6347<http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc6347>].  Once the DTLS handshake is

   completed, the UDPTL packets SHALL be transported in DTLS record

   layer "application_data" packets.

proposed to be detailed by:

   DTLS is used as specified in [RFC6347<http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc6347>].  Once the DTLS handshake is

   successfully completed, the UDPTL packets SHALL be transported in DTLS record

   layer "application_data" packets.
NOTE: such a proceeding ensures that the application (i.e., T.38) does not start to transmit facsimile data already during an ongoing underlying DTLS session establishment. This aspect might be important for end-to-end scenarios with gateway equipment and a possible "UDPTL/DTLS/UDP-to-UDPTL/UDP" interworking function).




__________________________________________________
Dr. Albrecht Schwarz
Alcatel-Lucent
Albrecht.Schwarz@alcatel-lucent.com<mailto:Albrecht.Schwarz@alcatel-lucent.com>