Re: [MMUSIC] Stephen Farrell's No Objection on draft-ietf-mmusic-sdp-mux-attributes-14: (with COMMENT)

Hello Stephen

    Thanks for the review . please see inline.

On Wed, Oct 26, 2016 at 2:50 AM, Stephen Farrell <stephen.farrell@cs.tcd.ie>
wrote:

> Stephen Farrell has entered the following ballot position for
> draft-ietf-mmusic-sdp-mux-attributes-14: No Objection
>
> When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all
> email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this
> introductory paragraph, however.)
>
>
> Please refer to https://www.ietf.org/iesg/statement/discuss-criteria.html
> for more information about IESG DISCUSS and COMMENT positions.
>
>
> The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here:
> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-mmusic-sdp-mux-attributes/
>
>
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> COMMENT:
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>
> - 4.5 and 5.7: What if the different a=crypto lines
> specify different strength ciphersuites? Wouldn't it be
> better to pick the strongest or to say they MUST be the
> same (as is done in 5.35)? If picking the first is the
> right answer then maybe warn folks to not put a stronger
> ciphersuite anywhere else?
>

[Suhas]:  I did think about it some more and I am not sure the mux draft
opens up an vulnerability in this scenario.
For example, Even with the IDENTICAL category, the Offerer can include a
weak cipher in all the m=lines and thus force the Answerer to select the
weak one or have the Answerer reject the Offer. I am not sure if making it
iDENTICAL would help us guard against the wrong cipher selection.
.
In the TRANSPORT scenario, if the Answerer selected the m=line with a weak
cipher the Offerer has 2 options a) Don't include the weak cipher b) Do
another Offer/Answer with the modified list (with strong ciphers or
inactive media)

Please advise ..

>
> - 5.36 vs. 5.39: It wasn't clear to me why these have
> different rules - can you explain?
>
>
>
[Suhas] : It looks like both the fingerprint (Section 5.36) and
zrtp-hash(5.39) attributes have the same Multiplexing category of TRANSPORT
assigned and thus follow the same rules. Am i missing something here ?

> _______________________________________________
> mmusic mailing list
> mmusic@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mmusic
>