Re: [MMUSIC] I-D Action: draft-ietf-mmusic-opportunistic-negotiation-01.txt

[Andy Hutton <[e-mail]>]

Christer, I understand the desire to put others through the same pain
as yourself that’s natural :-).

But is it really necessary in this case?

Andy

On Fri, Nov 3, 2017 at 9:34 AM, Christer Holmberg
<[e-mail]> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Just because the draft is “simple”, I still think we shall do it properly,
> as this is the specification defining the normative O/A procedures.
>
> Also, based on the discussions regarding SDP related terminology, I think
> we should talk about “m=“ sections instead of “m=“ lines.
>
> Sometimes we do need additional WGLCs - I’ve lost count on how many WGLCs
> we’ve had for BUNDLE by now :)
>
> Regards,
>
> Christer
>
>
> On 03/11/17 11:18, "Andy Hutton" <[e-mail]> wrote:
>
>>The comment from Christer below was the only WGLC comment I believe.
>>
>>Whilst I see some value in what Christer suggests I think this is a
>>simple draft which already adequately describes the solution and to be
>>honest I don't really want to go round the loop of making significant
>>changes to the draft and going through more last calls etc.
>>
>>Please can the chairs let us know how we should proceed.
>>
>>Unfortunately I will not be in Singapore to discuss but lets find a
>>way to get this done.
>>
>>Regards
>>Andy
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>On Thu, Sep 28, 2017 at 10:35 AM, Christer Holmberg
>><[e-mail]> wrote:
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>>>I agree that ideally we should have all the associated procedures in
>>>>one place and having two specs is not ideal however we have been going
>>>>round this circle for a couple of years now and just need to get this
>>>>done.
>>>>
>>>>Originally we wanted this work to be done in MMUSIC but it got
>>>>dispatched to SIPBrandy but it was later discovered that an update to
>>>>RFC 4568 was needed and that the SIPBrandy charter did not allow this
>>>>so we were told an MMUSIC draft was needed after all to update the RFC
>>>>before the SIPBrandy work could be completed.
>>>>
>>>>I do not want to start again and waste another couple of years lets
>>>>just get it finished.
>>>
>>> I suggest that we:
>>>
>>> 1)      Keep the SIPBRANDY draft as it is. Perhaps they could add a
>>>sentence
>>> pointing out that that the normative procedures will be described
>>> elsewhere.
>>> 2)      Keep the MMUSIC draft, but we add a proper 'SDP Offer/Answer
>>> Considerations’ section, where we include the normal subsections (create
>>> initial offer, process offer, process answer etc).
>>>
>>> Regards,
>>>
>>> Christer
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>On Wed, Sep 27, 2017 at 9:35 PM, Christer Holmberg
>>>><[e-mail]> wrote:
>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> In the mail you referenced the following is said:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> “I see your point but Currently SIPBRANDY is chartered to produce
>>>>> Opportunistic SRTP as a BCP. There is also a milestone to
>>>>>
>>>>> inform MMUSIC or other appropriate WGs of any changes needed to
>>>>>support
>>>>> Opportunistic SRTP (Not expected to be published
>>>>>
>>>>> as an RFC).  I think SIPBRANDY is just carrying out what they are
>>>>>chartered
>>>>> to do.”
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> But, draft-ietf-mmusic-opportunistic-negotiation doesn’t really define
>>>>>any
>>>>> procedures ­ it references the SIPBRANDY draft for everything.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> “[I-D.ietf-sipbrandy-osrtp] describes how Secure Real-time transport
>>>>>
>>>>>               protocol (SRTP) can be negotiated opportunistically.”
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> But, as the SIPBRANDY is only Informational, where are the normative
>>>>> procedures?
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> “The exact negotiation mechanism is however outside the scope of this
>>>>> document,
>>>>>
>>>>>               an example mechanism can be found in
>>>>> [I-D.ietf-sipbrandy-osrtp].”
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> How can negotiation be outside the scope of the document, when the
>>>>>title of
>>>>> the document contains “negotiating”?
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> In addition, the text says that the sipbrandy only contains “an
>>>>>example
>>>>> mechanism”.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> If we are going to have this document, I think we shall include
>>>>>normative
>>>>> offer/answer procedures. The draft DOES contain some normative
>>>>>procedures,
>>>>> but I think we shall have it all in one place. One shall not have to
>>>>>read
>>>>> both documents just to figure out the offer/answer procedures.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Regards,
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Christer
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> From: Gonzalo Salgueiro (gsalguei) [mailto:[e-mail]]
>>>>> Sent: 27 September 2017 21:58
>>>>> To: Christer Holmberg <[e-mail]>
>>>>> Cc: [e-mail]
>>>>> Subject: Re: [MMUSIC] I-D Action:
>>>>> draft-ietf-mmusic-opportunistic-negotiation-01.txt
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Hi Christer -
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> See this:
>>>>>
>>>>>https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/mmusic/wov2yErrgtUZURyRyVuVZ6K-nL
>>>>>I
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Cheers,
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> -G
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On Sep 27, 2017, at 9:19 AM, Christer Holmberg
>>>>> <[e-mail]> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>
>>>>> I am currently reviewing draft-ietf-sipbrandy-osrtp-03, and the
>>>>>following
>>>>> question comes to my mind: do we really need
>>>>> draft-ietf-mmusic-opportunistic-negotiation? :)
>>>>>
>>>>> Section 3 of draft-ietf-sipbrandy-osrtp-03 already more or less
>>>>>contains
>>>>> SDP Offer/Answer procedures for OSRTP. We can change the name of
>>>>>section 3
>>>>> in that draft to ³SDP Offer/Answer Procedures², modify the structure a
>>>>> little, and add whatever might be missing.
>>>>>
>>>>> Or, am I missing something?
>>>>>
>>>>> Regards,
>>>>>
>>>>> Christer
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On 14/09/17 19:03, "mmusic on behalf of [e-mail]"
>>>>> <[e-mail] on behalf of [e-mail]> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts
>>>>> directories.
>>>>> This draft is a work item of the Multiparty Multimedia Session Control
>>>>>WG
>>>>> of the IETF.
>>>>>
>>>>>       Title           : Negotiating SRTP and RTCP Feedback using the
>>>>> RTP/AVP Profile
>>>>>       Authors         : Andrew Hutton
>>>>>                         Roland Jesske
>>>>>                         Alan Johnston
>>>>>                         Gonzalo Salgueiro
>>>>>                         Bernard Aboba
>>>>> Filename        : draft-ietf-mmusic-opportunistic-negotiation-01.txt
>>>>> Pages           : 7
>>>>> Date            : 2017-09-14
>>>>>
>>>>> Abstract:
>>>>>  This document describes how the use of the Secure Real-time transport
>>>>>  protocol (SRTP) [RFC3711]. can be negotiated using the RTP/AVP (Audio
>>>>>  Video Profile) defined in [RFC3551].  Such a mechanism is used to
>>>>>  provide a means for encrypted media to be used in environments where
>>>>>  support for encryption is not known in advance, and not required.
>>>>>  The same mechanism is also applied to negotiation of the Extended RTP
>>>>>  Profile for Real-time Transport Control Protocol Based Feedback (RTP/
>>>>>  AVPF) [RFC4585].
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> The IETF datatracker status page for this draft is:
>>>>>
>>>>>https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-mmusic-opportunistic-negoti
>>>>>at
>>>>>i
>>>>> on/
>>>>>
>>>>> There are also htmlized versions available at:
>>>>>
>>>>>https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-mmusic-opportunistic-negotiation
>>>>>-0
>>>>>1
>>>>>
>>>>>https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-mmusic-opportunistic-n
>>>>>eg
>>>>>o
>>>>> tiation-01
>>>>>
>>>>> A diff from the previous version is available at:
>>>>>
>>>>>https://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=draft-ietf-mmusic-opportunistic-negot
>>>>>ia
>>>>>t
>>>>> ion-01
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Please note that it may take a couple of minutes from the time of
>>>>> submission
>>>>> until the htmlized version and diff are available at tools.ietf.org.
>>>>>
>>>>> Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP at:
>>>>> ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/
>>>>>
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> mmusic mailing list
>>>>> [e-mail]
>>>>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mmusic
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> mmusic mailing list
>>>>> [e-mail]
>>>>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mmusic
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> mmusic mailing list
>>>>> [e-mail]
>>>>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mmusic
>>>>>
>>>
>