IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [MMUSIC] [rtcweb] Tunnelling DTLS in SDP

Roman Shpount <roman@telurix.com> Mon, 11 July 2016 16:19 UTC

Return-Path: <roman@telurix.com>
X-Original-To: mmusic@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: mmusic@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8442212B03C for <mmusic@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 11 Jul 2016 09:19:14 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.599
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.599 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_LOW=-0.7] autolearn=ham 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 RfeQw19HGxhg for <mmusic@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 11 Jul 2016 09:19:12 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-io0-x235.google.com (mail-io0-x235.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4001:c06::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 9B52B12D592 for <mmusic@ietf.org>; Mon, 11 Jul 2016 09:19:12 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-io0-x235.google.com with SMTP id b62so8496142iod.3 for <mmusic@ietf.org>; Mon, 11 Jul 2016 09:19:12 -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=yQugzfB58RESYgJ4U7fopIYcLQnLTyELgXsfFX4oKKI=; b=isuesdAJGJgJJegqn+n6vFQvb6cueUn14U1yTqOpHQT0Naqa/oFhkUvEsJTneWRB9y 0N3XS4nRDazv0pbJi8f3RkvW6zMzoYyyKogidVOxZZsP5XUxrA1KtluHKoSRPwq5j4e/ /AjkXKYY2Uj9RvjPWGdcRaD71kyySzPldlV1EYc7MizYXwQXnHfB/LjZW7if+LOr5RrX sq0zFAO8XMJLTE04CkdcRixTVCXsWHEkAxNxnOPo6KW1UytRcWmJzmxHJi9grrrmvpN9 Ze9dX846vxKbc0GA55A6T+RVMKgcjsc2ELZCF+wP6s8rmFjI3s9JB7uiXBSto4Hwz0/i YzzQ==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=yQugzfB58RESYgJ4U7fopIYcLQnLTyELgXsfFX4oKKI=; b=Cx45f3BKeFExDh/f4dst84j8KJVcrR5gEGXivhH4O2LVx/b4Ok3iJD45tepabd3yb/ nrY0UZr5gOq22f28K9qHkHm80/mqreMFYxZPNu0h4ATw5O1qyo0sD0yJzret7kLAkyFD CnUy5weMrt05hyCl56lF26A5mrXIIVj+ac0bujiINLbnKHSyzjUuaNt0MjK3NNckxeTb PAu7cjSRqYaQFf9Ofn38UJAi8RgjmYrD+grUlMRTmSW6LbFuaghd0h1PdqxPBM4LHe48 iVe/3tnCmEn3BClTNrlVmS8bOYm9hnR+vAaxewjcMz+njv3/70XW+o+V6NlgMriu7jln YmEQ==
X-Gm-Message-State: ALyK8tIvgM55Ip0FTkx8uK3b8rlyM2uveH79wdz48v946hPH6qMQ0QOMKTHX3+6SlNw5iw==
X-Received: by 10.107.164.202 with SMTP id d71mr20978058ioj.80.1468253951879; Mon, 11 Jul 2016 09:19:11 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-it0-f51.google.com (mail-it0-f51.google.com. [209.85.214.51]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id 92sm4195254iok.22.2016.07.11.09.19.11 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Mon, 11 Jul 2016 09:19:11 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-it0-f51.google.com with SMTP id f6so9944297ith.0; Mon, 11 Jul 2016 09:19:11 -0700 (PDT)
X-Received: by 10.36.23.210 with SMTP id 201mr7275369ith.18.1468253950824; Mon, 11 Jul 2016 09:19:10 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.36.62.139 with HTTP; Mon, 11 Jul 2016 09:19:10 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <16EBD211-7FAD-43F1-A855-639EC17A17FE@cisco.com>
References: <CABcZeBOM1KoXpXFhvjS753EVpsMENWVen3CCdFj8ry36vPH0dg@mail.gmail.com> <CAD5OKxt2+YAJfR1q4qyhv_0D7AqMmrsTENTGNw-_vo9Dzr-ejA@mail.gmail.com> <16EBD211-7FAD-43F1-A855-639EC17A17FE@cisco.com>
From: Roman Shpount <roman@telurix.com>
Date: Mon, 11 Jul 2016 12:19:10 -0400
X-Gmail-Original-Message-ID: <CAD5OKxsA8UOE83GP67h0NB9H3Lqmw0eC6nhjB=A=7GwdeZf3fw@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CAD5OKxsA8UOE83GP67h0NB9H3Lqmw0eC6nhjB=A=7GwdeZf3fw@mail.gmail.com>
To: Cullen Jennings <fluffy@cisco.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="001a114370be2dff9405375e8335"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/mmusic/6UbcGlB5AR2jv5C3dH2AJe-3WKQ>
Cc: RTCWeb IETF <rtcweb@ietf.org>, mmusic WG <mmusic@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [MMUSIC] [rtcweb] Tunnelling DTLS in SDP
X-BeenThere: mmusic@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17
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: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/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: Mon, 11 Jul 2016 16:19:14 -0000

I would definitely like to proceed with this. There are certain issues
related to forking and new associations being setup by the answering party,
but I think they are resolvable. On the other hand, the benefits of reduced
call setup up time definitely make this worthwhile.

_____________
Roman Shpount

On Mon, Jul 11, 2016 at 8:22 AM, Cullen Jennings <fluffy@cisco.com> wrote:

>
> Quick questions for folks …  is an idea that we should explore a bit
> deeper before making decisions about it? or should we not proceed? or
> should we proceed? Just looking for feedback on where this should go next
>
> Thanks, Cullen
>
>
> On Apr 18, 2016, at 7:59 AM, Roman Shpount <roman@telurix.com> wrote:
>
> On Mon, Apr 4, 2016 at 9:10 AM, Eric Rescorla <ekr@rtfm.com> wrote:
>
>> I wanted to call your attention to a draft I just published with a
>> possibly stupid
>> idea.
>>
>> https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-rescorla-dtls-in-sdp-00
>>
>> A nontrivial fraction of call setup time in WebRTC is the DTLS handshake.
>> This document describes how to piggyback the first few handshake messages
>> in the SDP offer/answer exchange, thus reducing latency.
>>
>> Comments welcome.
>>
>>
> One other issue I thought off was that with DTLS SDP either offerer or
> answerer can start a new DTLS association. When answerer starts a new
> session it will have exactly the same problems as forking, since this will
> create multiple DTLS sessions with the same client random. This can be
> solved with some sort of fallback mechanism to either regular DTLS setup or
> to sending a ClientHello in the answer.
>
> Regards,
> _____________
> Roman Shpount
>
> _______________________________________________
> rtcweb mailing list
> rtcweb@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rtcweb
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> mmusic mailing list
> mmusic@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mmusic
>
>

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email