Re: [MMUSIC] Benjamin Kaduk's No Objection on draft-ietf-mmusic-rfc8843bis-04: (with COMMENT)
Christer Holmberg <christer.holmberg@ericsson.com> Wed, 01 September 2021 09:48 UTC
Return-Path: <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 ABBE83A15E7; Wed, 1 Sep 2021 02:48:22 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.553
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.553 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIMWL_WL_HIGH=-0.452, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=ericsson.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 Dl2iTFksVD3Z; Wed, 1 Sep 2021 02:48:16 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from EUR05-AM6-obe.outbound.protection.outlook.com (mail-am6eur05on2077.outbound.protection.outlook.com [40.107.22.77]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4A8FA3A15EB; Wed, 1 Sep 2021 02:48:16 -0700 (PDT)
ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; s=arcselector9901; d=microsoft.com; cv=none; b=jGHWRwCzTm38LsD/NfKH5DekFhxSO7WJg4hK104QcHzxUq60QW44+iuwsN1G8/Jxk8RPJa9XLVftxe/pZ4QhMymGxgetiNSbLOBJTY6JjGGTKbxNmqpsIz3XZytENufUJSZYRr82+jviuW/V3mNVMK6IJZvnWKWlX0/n+st0JrLH4kqGl7hucRt1QDF+7aeSEcWE5BsGnlPvnH3Lc8xSTyiPWABQNv8iih7W5pgDp3BfMw1L8gUjx4544x7hFt+2J/J1C87RY1CUxgC/9V3dfLMAn+FeOWub/CUeG/QSOUTR3Tv/NUTf/aoqwCTrRIABu1uZH5ehUIEcfI9lkCPZFg==
ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=microsoft.com; s=arcselector9901; h=From:Date:Subject:Message-ID:Content-Type:MIME-Version; bh=31fBdyUfici3ANMiTEh9rhVkAsc55s/Qs+y+NySHGQ8=; b=aEFqWUvRc/m+kBjAOVFE3aRiiblugORgk1poPRPZPVy4pssDBWy1mvUZVrsjyEwZKTMHA8JGxQUIlJcoUT45fggsPEB0KqR5Lej7XjnWKByXhuOs2TywTivLcN4I6b4EnRWVMnCGyDJ+CvUbn6XxBhF6XJJKL7k+5vZVFNOi4ewvMJOVojCDRQYU8v3H+8aOSohhBKF8ZKGKXusmkWEWdu9mKcqzpZa2gFTdkOY/TVDKag5AsheC1Zzn98RBYqvmkmNxQd17cxoWigMRPOCUk+ZDfmCzYqZzeI5Hyyg5A0BsIFD/8BSkDDBCJfNiyLXnfSDFGHyFRfXkxXmZe8j9DA==
ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.microsoft.com 1; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=ericsson.com; dmarc=pass action=none header.from=ericsson.com; dkim=pass header.d=ericsson.com; arc=none
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=ericsson.com; s=selector1; h=From:Date:Subject:Message-ID:Content-Type:MIME-Version:X-MS-Exchange-SenderADCheck; bh=31fBdyUfici3ANMiTEh9rhVkAsc55s/Qs+y+NySHGQ8=; b=I38slPXh2++lNxwt1XsxikOGc49UDP4r0yJJabo/kcl6QFcIo6Bz4E9pYFvmWDkQHkLRGolJa+20TQ92HxhFR9HKax2YUvDNUbn1yUoUvr5pbaJscm8FeJyEhqLFFbryww3H1POn2ybtaSI5EGdXami/NkRcWob/cD8Na66ChJI=
Received: from HE1PR07MB4441.eurprd07.prod.outlook.com (2603:10a6:7:9f::27) by HE1PR0701MB2764.eurprd07.prod.outlook.com (2603:10a6:3:91::19) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id 15.20.4478.16; Wed, 1 Sep 2021 09:48:12 +0000
Received: from HE1PR07MB4441.eurprd07.prod.outlook.com ([fe80::49b7:5cc:5aeb:fb2a]) by HE1PR07MB4441.eurprd07.prod.outlook.com ([fe80::49b7:5cc:5aeb:fb2a%4]) with mapi id 15.20.4478.019; Wed, 1 Sep 2021 09:48:12 +0000
From: Christer Holmberg <christer.holmberg@ericsson.com>
To: Benjamin Kaduk <kaduk@mit.edu>
CC: The IESG <iesg@ietf.org>, "draft-ietf-mmusic-rfc8843bis@ietf.org" <draft-ietf-mmusic-rfc8843bis@ietf.org>, "mmusic-chairs@ietf.org" <mmusic-chairs@ietf.org>, "mmusic@ietf.org" <mmusic@ietf.org>, "fandreas@cisco.com" <fandreas@cisco.com>
Thread-Topic: Benjamin Kaduk's No Objection on draft-ietf-mmusic-rfc8843bis-04: (with COMMENT)
Thread-Index: AQHXmHJSPSYzT/rFQUWvom0P6CNN/KuF6AxAgAg31ACAANbgcA==
Date: Wed, 01 Sep 2021 09:48:12 +0000
Message-ID: <HE1PR07MB4441EA0EF35670AE6E790C7A93CD9@HE1PR07MB4441.eurprd07.prod.outlook.com>
References: <162975946482.6034.8466685856163143406@ietfa.amsl.com> <HE1PR07MB44418D1A25A58454476DA02193C79@HE1PR07MB4441.eurprd07.prod.outlook.com> <20210831204008.GA96301@kduck.mit.edu>
In-Reply-To: <20210831204008.GA96301@kduck.mit.edu>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
authentication-results: mit.edu; dkim=none (message not signed) header.d=none;mit.edu; dmarc=none action=none header.from=ericsson.com;
x-ms-publictraffictype: Email
x-ms-office365-filtering-correlation-id: a24d9e12-5326-4dd1-04be-08d96d2d9d07
x-ms-traffictypediagnostic: HE1PR0701MB2764:
x-microsoft-antispam-prvs: <HE1PR0701MB2764D12A19576249A3437E7993CD9@HE1PR0701MB2764.eurprd07.prod.outlook.com>
x-ms-oob-tlc-oobclassifiers: OLM:8882;
x-ms-exchange-senderadcheck: 1
x-ms-exchange-antispam-relay: 0
x-microsoft-antispam: BCL:0;
x-microsoft-antispam-message-info: 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
x-forefront-antispam-report: CIP:255.255.255.255; CTRY:; LANG:en; SCL:1; SRV:; IPV:NLI; SFV:NSPM; H:HE1PR07MB4441.eurprd07.prod.outlook.com; PTR:; CAT:NONE; SFS:(4636009)(376002)(366004)(396003)(346002)(39860400002)(136003)(478600001)(38100700002)(122000001)(76116006)(6506007)(7696005)(8676002)(5660300002)(66556008)(966005)(316002)(38070700005)(55016002)(86362001)(64756008)(54906003)(66946007)(33656002)(52536014)(71200400001)(4326008)(8936002)(26005)(83380400001)(66476007)(2906002)(44832011)(186003)(9686003)(66446008)(6916009); DIR:OUT; SFP:1101;
x-ms-exchange-antispam-messagedata-chunkcount: 1
x-ms-exchange-antispam-messagedata-0: SCwEub5UDAXNyTCZG4DEEBoBtad+6TGM6Vfg37IFuAPBpof8RtyQkBNXYvfPSp9N0WAR105DkXlYwYI1TvIzgydQoKv7sxnVUss1TJEm9mkPThFC2dRlXt6qvZMlT2IrVPkaeoBLtgNGrr1VOdXSFdi5hXt4KTNAMjSkDG6v+cu/WfWqiMErebTWLaCSrm1MGXUw2aepzGcoSNbnPIUzrWqgG1cwJKkYFWgNjUOQQsKodA37mECRZLlW445+Jacm3pbP+DhO00ar1/mb7s3iCwhqNq/nXunLOrfGIiVsDr1BbwyeFso1p8a9CebpSQRd0bG9w7brGENKg0Z7ZKm40PFuA0LGsHNyjOSIP3hMl2raxNBpi5HIivBxSmVX0ZtpvIqwB9XTgtLbSLeHZlkmi/WdTwMYr9FkTJ01U5HC3COs4QfP/oG6hAV/gefIqFXiwQBkm26nWVlvX591uuE05YfdehF4xhZLabyWX/Kn0Rv5VK7394kxjRB2dpgeUPX2OTUqjKcgFW8zcJ6FC0wsQvYPpOBOkMR4GArovnnjyh64FXz01dJsFfB/Cwjd94y8QwHAd40WTketuccQG4wRvb1sPYJC5OMaRsh+HfRvLbjA97sF59ZSCC1SEayr0FjBj2A0nt5UeDjtNqPpeZo2dPhQMmpyaEYS+qLDJSIaHnHatGs91TPBYl+uVkKOOO237JfJmpqMD515eC9RiNT4uNsGIaQTVDc6nm3dfVM5EPnW/A6E1hIVEXTdWIs0j4k5aXznFeRaAK5s5dgIdEq31+0cNCMrm4i88q1uCVx2JvOBuGI7t3yx2pwFeSAh3u8imL6+xK7IqfEqGVWbVbWH78Ul2JNcst6OWsVn5WUAjZ2iCp8xX5/3ae+hz0hWTIVQxyPV/CNRJoKrVP3reHK0PCXy9r4rENDU7uMStZ6iJ/Cxo0HyVpWmELBW7Vpgpjm2PI1F/I4j1yjWOpa2xXakcjmFrg8Jx85sJ4PepUHfDNZdFwPfEgHwB4Z6caLLeRWlI6DqA+uVfgdalfG3R+4ymDUiIR/4b7y84+2TyVg6vJwl9DhD4JAe+g1ETF4mVT91HUE5rhxjf9tTx14r4NUf52u12LnCffsowGZntf6NvOLUxeJdAwKiG0YyhCBv2p1XCz9VzY41VwcoRAOx36eCtgRfkdgaf9H6JASn/Y3UdReU5i+ipninCpFuO2vko3B8eHXMnay++gzF1yLfzzawRU58TGL/RaDWLWvoRNBdb2cEJwiJeScgFosb122v8kwF0pxSi/wtFv+8b2asHxaTNlSVAFroBha97+/Q3oEWxuK0AHz27GSJQuvnI9yW84jZ
x-ms-exchange-transport-forked: True
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-OriginatorOrg: ericsson.com
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-AuthAs: Internal
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-AuthSource: HE1PR07MB4441.eurprd07.prod.outlook.com
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-Network-Message-Id: a24d9e12-5326-4dd1-04be-08d96d2d9d07
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-originalarrivaltime: 01 Sep 2021 09:48:12.3295 (UTC)
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-fromentityheader: Hosted
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-id: 92e84ceb-fbfd-47ab-be52-080c6b87953f
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-mailboxtype: HOSTED
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-userprincipalname: THU/GQ6ySowXxz0Sb58ZPC3/Tfmry1cCIyIYicPk/7zN59Aku6EZ0XzpJ8yR3iolfhCbDpDmEKoHBwD5ENS3GolSxP215EbWahVzyql9F7w=
X-MS-Exchange-Transport-CrossTenantHeadersStamped: HE1PR0701MB2764
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/mmusic/Yi2z12kye--8-1T95qXnZICbGCU>
Subject: Re: [MMUSIC] Benjamin Kaduk's No Objection on draft-ietf-mmusic-rfc8843bis-04: (with COMMENT)
X-BeenThere: mmusic@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
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: Wed, 01 Sep 2021 09:48:23 -0000
Hi Benjamin, I will not reply to your input on Lars' comments, as there are no further issues. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- COMMENT: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>The errata report eid 6437 should probably be marked as "Verified" (or at least something other than "Reported") since it is being fixed in this update. >> >> Yes. I have informed the chairs about that, but I will remind them. > > They will have to pester the AD about it, but it's good to have them helping the AD to remember to do it. Ok. Flemming/Bo, please handle this. >>> Since I reviewed draft-ietf-mmusic-sdp-bundle-negotiation before it >>> became RFC 8843, I don't have much left to say about this document. >>> I did look over the diffs between the version I reviewed, RFC 8843 >>> itself, and this version; there was one point (mentioning the URI >>> allocation for the RTP SDES header extension in the main body of the >>> document) that got some proposed text in email but didn't seem to >>> make it into this document: >>> https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/mmusic/eFxsB6G-_LmrEDMSOxfc16tzVhU/ . >>> It's a quite minor point, so not a problem if the change is not made. >> >> Nobody objected to adding the text, so if you want I can do it. > > Seems reasonable. Wil be added. --- >> Some other remarks from looking over the document as a whole: >> >> Section 7.2.2 >> >> >Perhaps s/The example/The following example/ (twice), since there are two examples in this section.< > >> I will fix as suggested. --- >> Section 7.3.1 >> >>> If there are no more identification-tags in the identification-tag list, the answerer >>> MUST NOT create the BUNDLE group. Unless the answerer rejects the >>> whole offer, the answerer MUST apply the answerer procedures for >>> moving an "m=" section out of a BUNDLE group (Section 7.3.2) or >>> rejecting an "m=" section within a BUNDLE group (Section 7.3.3) to >>> every bundled "m=" section in the offer when creating the answer. >>> >>> Just to confirm: the last sentence only applies in the "no more identification-tags" case described by the preceding sentence? I wonder if it's worth adding a couple words to solidify that connection. >> >> Perhaps saying: "In addition, unless the answerer rejects,...." > > Sounds good. Will be fixed. --- >> Section 7.3.3 >> >>> When an answerer wants to reject a bundled "m=" section in an answer, >>> it MUST first check the following criterion: >>> >>> * In the corresponding offer, the "m=" section is the offerer-tagged >>> "m=" section. >>> >>> The definition of "offerer-tagged "m=" section" is doing some heavy >>> lifting here, by requiring that it be in a *subsequent* offer. I wonder if this is worth calling out here, since the defined term also has a natural reading as a generic phrase, which would give a different meaning. >> >> Since the offerer-tagged "m=" section only applies to subsequent offers, I think it is implicit. >> >> However, if you think it is unclear, perhaps we could say "offer (subsequent)" > > I agree that "offerer-tagged "m=" section" is defined to only apply to subsequent offers, but I still think it's worth saying "offer (subsequent)" > -- there's not much context in this sentence to remind the reader that "offerer-tagged "m=" section" is a defined term. I will change to "offer (subsequent)". --- >> Section 7.4 >> >>> When an offerer receives an answer, if the answer contains a BUNDLE >>> group, the offerer MUST check that any bundled "m=" section in the >>> answer was indicated as bundled in the corresponding offer. [...] >>> >>> By my reading, this doesn't require the offerer to check that the "m=" >>> sections in the answer are still in the same BUNDLE group that they were in in the offer (if there are multiple BUNDLE groups active). >> >> Section 7.3 says that an answerer is only allowed to include a bundled "m=" section in the same BUNDLE groups as the bundled "m=" line in the corresponding offer. > > Right, the answerer is not allowed to move across groups ... but we've seen buggy or broken implementations before, and it's probably wise for offerers to not blindly > assume that the answerer is correctly implemented. The answere should still validate the correctness of the input it receives. > >> But, perhaps we could say: "was indicated as bundled in the corresponding offer (for the same BUNDLE group)" > > Sure. Will be fixed. --- >> Section 9.3.1.2 >> >>> In an initial BUNDLE offer, if the suggested offerer-tagged "m=" >>> section contained an SDP 'rtcp-mux-only' attribute, the "m=" section >>> was for RTP-based media; thus, the answerer does not accept the "m=" >>> section in the created BUNDLE group, and the answerer MUST move the >>> "m=" section out of the BUNDLE group (Section 7.3.2); include the >>> attribute in the moved "m=" section and enable RTP/RTCP multiplexing >>> for the media associated with the "m=" section; or reject the "m=" >>> section (Section 7.3.3). >>> >>> I'm having a hard time parsing this (long!) sentence. The first >>> semicolon seems to be used to join related sentences, but the latter >>> two seem to be acting as list separators (where the list members have internal commas), and that's a little jarring to have the different semicolon uses in the same sentence. >>> Additionally, if I keep that parsing, this seems to say that all "m=" sessions for RTP-based media cannot be included in the BUNDLE group by the answerer, which is quite surprising. >>> If we applied s/thus,/thus, if/ and s/, and/,/, then this parsing would make more sense to me, but I don't know if that would provide the intended semantics. >> >> What about: >> >> "In an initial BUNDLE offer, if the suggested offerer-tagged "m=" >> section contained an SDP 'rtcp-mux-only' attribute, the "m=" section >> was for RTP-based media. If the answerer does not accept the "m=" >> section in the created BUNDLE group, and moves the >> "m=" section out of the BUNDLE group (Section 7.3.2), the answerer >> MUST include the attribute in the moved "m=" section and enable RTP/RTCP >> multiplexing for the media associated with the "m=" section. If the answerer >> rejects the "m=" section (Section 7.3.3) the answerer MUST NOT include >> the attribute." > > That seems to make sense; thanks! > This does allow the answere to accept the "m=" section in the BUNDLE group, which may or may not have been > allowed by the old text. I assume you will know if that's okay. I think the old text also allowed that, but I agree that the lack of "and" before "the answerer does not accept" might make that unclear. Or, did you refer to something else? --- >> Section 16 >> >> >Did we consider reframing the IANA considerations along the lines of "update the existing registration to use this document as a reference"? >> >Doing that makes it a little easier to understand the history of the registry entries, though needing the history is admittedly a rather uncommon case. >> >> Yes, we did, and the intention is to fix that in the next version of >> the document :) > > Hooray :) :) --- >> Section 17 >> >>> It seems that the logic for routing bundled RTP/RTCP messages to the proper media stream processor could be quite complex, and complex systems are >>> potentially prone to error, but I'm not really sure there's a useful way to acknowledge that in the security considerations here. >> >> I don't think it belongs to the Security Considerations. >> >> Also, people may have different opinions on what is complex to implement :) > > Fair enough :) > > Thanks for the updates, Thanks! Regards, Christer
- [MMUSIC] Benjamin Kaduk's No Objection on draft-i… Benjamin Kaduk via Datatracker
- Re: [MMUSIC] Benjamin Kaduk's No Objection on dra… Christer Holmberg
- Re: [MMUSIC] Benjamin Kaduk's No Objection on dra… Benjamin Kaduk
- Re: [MMUSIC] Benjamin Kaduk's No Objection on dra… Christer Holmberg
- Re: [MMUSIC] Benjamin Kaduk's No Objection on dra… Benjamin Kaduk