Re: [MMUSIC] BUNDLE: mandate RTP/RTCP multiplexing?

Christer Holmberg <christer.holmberg@ericsson.com> Thu, 02 May 2013 10:01 UTC

Return-Path: <prvs=3834f4ee55=christer.holmberg@ericsson.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 2FF1321F993C for <mmusic@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 2 May 2013 03:01:02 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -6.136
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.136 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.112, BAYES_00=-2.599, HELO_EQ_SE=0.35, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 78sbnHG92asW for <mmusic@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 2 May 2013 03:00:57 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mailgw2.ericsson.se (mailgw2.ericsson.se [193.180.251.37]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 60B6821F8605 for <mmusic@ietf.org>; Thu, 2 May 2013 03:00:56 -0700 (PDT)
X-AuditID: c1b4fb25-b7f396d000007d06-9e-5182395700d2
Received: from ESESSHC020.ericsson.se (Unknown_Domain [153.88.253.125]) by mailgw2.ericsson.se (Symantec Mail Security) with SMTP id A9.3A.32006.75932815; Thu, 2 May 2013 12:00:55 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from ESESSMB209.ericsson.se ([169.254.9.167]) by ESESSHC020.ericsson.se ([153.88.183.78]) with mapi id 14.02.0328.009; Thu, 2 May 2013 12:00:54 +0200
From: Christer Holmberg <christer.holmberg@ericsson.com>
To: Justin Uberti <juberti@google.com>, Paul Kyzivat <pkyzivat@alum.mit.edu>
Thread-Topic: [MMUSIC] BUNDLE: mandate RTP/RTCP multiplexing?
Thread-Index: Ac5FpkrHryzI/aQNT0iUvXy00zH5hwADtcYAAAPFvoAAAQhZgAA4imSAABwqMXA=
Date: Thu, 2 May 2013 10:00:54 +0000
Message-ID: <7594FB04B1934943A5C02806D1A2204B1C369709@ESESSMB209.ericsson.se>
References: <7594FB04B1934943A5C02806D1A2204B1C368E12@ESESSMB209.ericsson.se> <517FFB7E.8050801@alum.mit.edu> <CABkgnnVf6f3RrP2h66_8hFPZScWU3Xp4f1x0dmW0xhmvZRQ70Q@mail.gmail.com> <51801BBD.1010505@alum.mit.edu> <CAOJ7v-12j0k1W7GRfOzvPmfN-BZ0ve=fHVcWy+avronfc8wFYw@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAOJ7v-12j0k1W7GRfOzvPmfN-BZ0ve=fHVcWy+avronfc8wFYw@mail.gmail.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-originating-ip: [153.88.183.20]
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_7594FB04B1934943A5C02806D1A2204B1C369709ESESSMB209erics_"
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Brightmail-Tracker: H4sIAAAAAAAAA+NgFnrPLMWRmVeSWpSXmKPExsUyM+JvrW64ZVOgwdKDwhZbpwpZTF3+mMVi xYYDrA7MHn/ff2DyWLCp1GPJkp9MAcxR3DZJiSVlwZnpefp2CdwZO1o/shU0xVbcPnKOrYFx T1QXIyeHhICJxPPmx0wQtpjEhXvr2boYuTiEBA4zSuzf2skKkhASWMwoMaUDyObgYBOwkOj+ pw1iigj4SPz7IAxiMguoS1xdHARSLCxgI9G0YycziC0iYCsx5d4NdgjbT+L8vE6wTSwCKhKb Tzewgdi8Ar4SH3a8Z4HYOp9J4s72n2ANnAKBEtMaP7OA2IxAp30/tQasmVlAXOLWk/lQJwtI LNlznhnCFpV4+fgfK4StKHF1+nKo+nyJy7vOMkMsE5Q4OfMJywRG0VlIRs1CUjYLSdkssNc0 Jdbv0ocoUZSY0v2QHcLWkGidM5cdWXwBI/sqRvbcxMyc9HKjTYzA+Dq45bfqDsY750QOMUpz sCiJ8yZzNQYKCaQnlqRmp6YWpBbFF5XmpBYfYmTi4AQRXFINjHYGS2qaXSZ18c03U5rKIezf tslBQCD3xD7ZTq+PBWFi+2eFhIccv1e7ZNmVVcvi2XaG7P1yvJaB39CtbXa21qffGvz7BBR9 ec75byvf42i28YjrZKmrf558ui8bFFu1zuHNz0PPTjJzeKUobpd4vTr9xM9gXmf+8wZFcgaf fvbJvGxS7++uUGIpzkg01GIuKk4EADhmLtGCAgAA
Cc: "mmusic@ietf.org" <mmusic@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [MMUSIC] BUNDLE: mandate RTP/RTCP multiplexing?
X-BeenThere: mmusic@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
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: Thu, 02 May 2013 10:01:02 -0000

Hi,

Things would certainly work with separate RTCP ports. But, it would mean an additional 5-tuple, with associated ICE etc, which is what we want to avoid by using BUNDLE.

And, as BUNDLE already mandates the SDP offerer to offer rtcp-mux, my suggestion is to mandate the SDP answerer to accept it (assuming it enables BUNDLE, that is).

However, if people have issues with a MUST, a compromise would be “SHOULD, unless some mechanism explicitly requires the usage of separate RTCP ports”… or something like that.

Regards,

Christer

From: mmusic-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:mmusic-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Justin Uberti
Sent: 2. toukokuuta 2013 1:29
To: Paul Kyzivat
Cc: mmusic@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [MMUSIC] BUNDLE: mandate RTP/RTCP multiplexing?

+1 to mandating rtcp-mux when BUNDLEing.

Otherwise, we have weird situations, such as if you try to BUNDLE a SCTP session and a non-RTCP-mux RTP session together; the former has 1 ICE component, the latter has 2.

On Tue, Apr 30, 2013 at 12:30 PM, Paul Kyzivat <pkyzivat@alum.mit.edu<mailto:pkyzivat@alum.mit.edu>> wrote:
On 4/30/13 3:00 PM, Martin Thomson wrote:
On 30 April 2013 10:12, Paul Kyzivat <pkyzivat@alum.mit.edu<mailto:pkyzivat@alum.mit.edu>> wrote:
What are the implications of *not* mandating it?

I'm more interesting in learning why someone might want to split it
out.  I can't see any reason for doing that...

...that is, except perhaps for some of the fictitious attacks I invent
when someone suggests that RTCP is a good place for a security
mechanism of one sort or other.

Well, IIUC it was separate before there was a way to combine them.
Why was that? Why hasn't separate RTCP gone away entirely?

        Thanks,
        Paul

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