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

Paul Kyzivat <pkyzivat@alum.mit.edu> Tue, 30 April 2013 19:30 UTC

Return-Path: <pkyzivat@alum.mit.edu>
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 BDAAD21F984B for <mmusic@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 30 Apr 2013 12:30:13 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -0.204
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.204 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.233, BAYES_00=-2.599, FH_RELAY_NODNS=1.451, HELO_MISMATCH_NET=0.611, RDNS_NONE=0.1]
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 9en0DpbmT-pR for <mmusic@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 30 Apr 2013 12:30:08 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from qmta02.westchester.pa.mail.comcast.net (qmta02.westchester.pa.mail.comcast.net [IPv6:2001:558:fe14:43:76:96:62:24]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id AF50D21F9A89 for <mmusic@ietf.org>; Tue, 30 Apr 2013 12:30:06 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from omta03.westchester.pa.mail.comcast.net ([76.96.62.27]) by qmta02.westchester.pa.mail.comcast.net with comcast id WAg11l0050bG4ec51KW66E; Tue, 30 Apr 2013 19:30:06 +0000
Received: from Paul-Kyzivats-MacBook-Pro.local ([50.138.229.164]) by omta03.westchester.pa.mail.comcast.net with comcast id WKW61l00g3ZTu2S3PKW6P9; Tue, 30 Apr 2013 19:30:06 +0000
Message-ID: <51801BBD.1010505@alum.mit.edu>
Date: Tue, 30 Apr 2013 15:30:05 -0400
From: Paul Kyzivat <pkyzivat@alum.mit.edu>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.7; rv:17.0) Gecko/20130328 Thunderbird/17.0.5
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Martin Thomson <martin.thomson@gmail.com>
References: <7594FB04B1934943A5C02806D1A2204B1C368E12@ESESSMB209.ericsson.se> <517FFB7E.8050801@alum.mit.edu> <CABkgnnVf6f3RrP2h66_8hFPZScWU3Xp4f1x0dmW0xhmvZRQ70Q@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CABkgnnVf6f3RrP2h66_8hFPZScWU3Xp4f1x0dmW0xhmvZRQ70Q@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=comcast.net; s=q20121106; t=1367350206; bh=/yaCZR4SQD5hGEpDCGOYDu4SHoPemwoaeiuA93W3ngs=; h=Received:Received:Message-ID:Date:From:MIME-Version:To:Subject: Content-Type; b=UKH7GTTKxOKPyydGR6h2TwuLXCQjgPPgsB1eF5eOn4JV2jj8+dsfyETdA7EEHvCUD EjztOk8utV6y/rnx32TYFrmH6DcijAUDjTiIeY0PiRbdqFTdK2ZXvlulZJ1r5Gnz9u pa/HD9rPqfPa15uG/Yp5OgWlK5DeCAI36ThZEo+IrlGW+nqwkKTc/a9bLpCOzY6F77 if6umH/Gsa2QU9W988a6ctFT8V35MJ8RIyTGAHCvbCD/2kK79oHHhqCTtK9z/2HTeC GG4Iv01PEh/9NElRCTxvtCdiR3WlyIuBIeTY8bk5Tmtj/m1bXzK3r2mxYuXBbEi4Lw 27TvoejRKjjbw==
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: Tue, 30 Apr 2013 19:30:13 -0000

On 4/30/13 3:00 PM, Martin Thomson wrote:
> On 30 April 2013 10:12, Paul Kyzivat <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