Re: [MMUSIC] Is ice-mismatch media or session level?

Suhas Nandakumar <suhasietf@gmail.com> Thu, 16 May 2019 20:28 UTC

Return-Path: <suhasietf@gmail.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 D0E291200CE for <mmusic@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 16 May 2019 13:28:26 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.998
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.998 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.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 QCrl_O3BlwrI for <mmusic@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 16 May 2019 13:28:22 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-vs1-xe32.google.com (mail-vs1-xe32.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::e32]) (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 487021200B1 for <mmusic@ietf.org>; Thu, 16 May 2019 13:28:22 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-vs1-xe32.google.com with SMTP id q13so3196012vso.2 for <mmusic@ietf.org>; Thu, 16 May 2019 13:28:22 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=PiOlwjal/6HN0iEzo+16ka2GScDvIkdToeCVU2rEEKI=; b=XtI3RI0zNSVeotulRR3cLXD3zZg+jn00rIfMc4rUASMrkOLNkhu/aKQR3iQfXOjBcB fkRdzotg8X0t3dONvhPADuCZvwsEl9ICn0oe8X4HRSbeSfT37QiEX4/y0Cq+8LJ2vmg5 tCcM81SwqlAUBgPhReN4+vOCi8uxzgDvUSApWGSXbK63WcjDEpiIMSw5rQHJzLYIkTch c33NgLR7G9KVFQNndxTktK1MZmoc+O0K/eiwg+fsbHZcxCPdnWoQvHI+U0Dgouth/g4D 54dztD3/Ffl84RrZ89kcHRCyzQGvoLhPU+XiU6ITs3YeeUECy98MfabPqK89ZOy6qhFI 7zPQ==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=PiOlwjal/6HN0iEzo+16ka2GScDvIkdToeCVU2rEEKI=; b=jfW0b+OMYyrxejko7cUec42HuBTzJXXX/Mrd2tPLLr4PpvhYs3X0VbfY2jfk4Un9xY Q2knZekIYbU3LEbOK+kt6j9NUHLwmwfUBNB9l4MkIERH3Ub2pfy72ZXX8MbIpJvF5n8k k2epEcWUmZ0HyY4TMy+arGCsyH0pjzdU02Psc8gN/y0VeL65/RBzR4GBEpinSlfXHUC1 abq9e+ccRCvY6P9wnHpeJw5vgag1PF/DG9HoB5B9tsHXGaA05tfEf5yIb/z1DYZ4JV1H yp94zEG8GzBrbdWtBeLdO9dXFrTxXBc2RO9m9dApV/hO8FIWrBoB21eUIH+nhOJWJ1rC nhpw==
X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAUmySyDn2gDE4peRQ4IF4MkVIUmlJb8P+AZrBlne8smXrWT+ALr Fos6TZmfsCRE+B7dLOu5sG+/5D6ltEyZoeACFJSA3RGyVEc=
X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqzw7t3txLL67TjG6RUJelOJdvtdBtXOpDzQm8g3I8yIBbbU+E4uQGy/8KhK7D585Pa65SIayrFRorYrGFlwAcY=
X-Received: by 2002:a67:c503:: with SMTP id e3mr16367994vsk.230.1558038501326; Thu, 16 May 2019 13:28:21 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <CAD5OKxvGcC0inLRxwTHKdWW3z6xM2PWjV=1J8+3_zwQsF3tCaA@mail.gmail.com> <HE1PR07MB3161E1BDB1E2439E1A9CE785933F0@HE1PR07MB3161.eurprd07.prod.outlook.com> <CAD5OKxtqKi1ucRXd5xrZrsM6hiqu=FUULx3mQv+=bZx3YHMbLg@mail.gmail.com> <310293b1-0fbf-9b74-03ca-63ad8d4b80bd@cisco.com> <CAMRcRGSyWB3O04CDOUx1oXtyL=AyB--dM-e+ABfm2dN16RK7sw@mail.gmail.com> <222e6d5f-dcca-56c8-095d-e8ca96b1948b@cisco.com> <CAMRcRGQYuv0M5pcrjAfFLUk5J4VcGMAMm_hSTWB+k=ackcxbZQ@mail.gmail.com> <e3523821-b7bf-0d1b-7b10-d38b64e4110c@cisco.com> <26BDCCFB-A65F-417C-8291-B490386ED869@ericsson.com>
In-Reply-To: <26BDCCFB-A65F-417C-8291-B490386ED869@ericsson.com>
From: Suhas Nandakumar <suhasietf@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 16 May 2019 13:28:10 -0700
Message-ID: <CAMRcRGQtyttNhJrPkUEVS9wkVHVQ=XeZ2HDUEBwq-g5995mgvg@mail.gmail.com>
To: Christer Holmberg <christer.holmberg@ericsson.com>
Cc: Flemming Andreasen <fandreas@cisco.com>, mmusic WG <mmusic@ietf.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="0000000000006b04470589071b25"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/mmusic/amk-AN-wkbm8aIqaeUvUwdlyOOw>
Subject: Re: [MMUSIC] Is ice-mismatch media or session level?
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: Thu, 16 May 2019 20:28:27 -0000

On Thu, May 16, 2019 at 12:25 AM Christer Holmberg <
christer.holmberg@ericsson.com> wrote:

> Hi,
>
>
>
> >>>> I am inclined to leave it as media-level attribute. I am not sure
> what more clarification is needed in the text today ?
>
> >>
>
> >>> Are the clarifications Roman suggested below already included ?
>
> >
>
> >> I am finding it hard to parse suggested clarification. I am sure I am
> missing something.
>
> >
>
> > Roman suggested ice-mismatch should be defined for both media- and
> session-level.
>
> >
>
> > Looking further at the current text, I'm not sure I agree since there
> really isn't any normative behavior associated with receiving ice-mismatch.
>
> > Thus, I'd suggest simply keeping it as-is and media-level only.
>
>
>
> No matter whether it's session and/or media level, I still think there
> needs to be normative behavior associated with receiving ice-mismatch.
>
>
>
> Section 5.4 of RFC 8445 says:
>
>
>
>    "Each using protocol needs to define whether the using protocol is
>
>    vulnerable to ICE mismatch, how ICE mismatch is detected, and *whether*
>
> *   specific actions need to be taken when ICE mismatch is detected*."
>

[Suhas] RFC5245 never defined a normative behavior on how a ice-mismtach
needs to be
handled and I do agree with the intent there.

ice-sip-sdp says this today

Also to note, this specification provides no guidance on how an
   controlling/initiator agent should proceed in scenarios where the the
   SDP answer includes "a=ice-mismatch" from the peer.


I am inclined to leave it as it is. RFC8445 doesn't mandate it either
(referring to  *whether*

*   specific actions need to be taken"*



>
> Regards,
>
>
>
> Christer
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On Sun, May 12, 2019 at 8:41 PM Flemming Andreasen <mailto:
> fandreas@cisco.com> wrote:
>
> Based on the errata, it seems like the intent was for to be media-level.
> I'd suggest we keep it that way and add the clarifications you outline
> below.
>
>
>
> If people feel otherwise, please speak up no later than May 19.
>
>
>
> Thanks
>
>
>
> -- Flemming (with chair hat on)
>
>
>
>
>
> On 4/29/19 4:44 PM, Roman Shpount wrote:
>
> Hi Christer,
>
>
>
> Thank you for reviewing and responding.
>
>
>
> On Sat, Apr 27, 2019 at 1:48 PM Christer Holmberg <mailto:
> christer.holmberg@ericsson.com> wrote:
>
> Before we just change something back we need to think what the reason for
> the change to media-level was. Could it be related to RTCWEB?
>
>
>
>
>
> This is definitely not RTCWEB related, since RTCWEB should never generate
> ice-mismatch or use it for any reason.
>
>
>
> The ice-mismatch attribute was session only according to RFC 5245 Section
> 21.1.4 (https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc5245#section-21.1.4). At the same
> time, according to RFC 5245 Section 15..3 (
> https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc5245#section-15.3), ice-mismatch is media
> level attribute only. This being said, according to RFC 5245 Section 6.1 (
> https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc5245#section-6.1), ice-mismatch applies to
> the whole session, but it is specified per m= line. According to errata
> 3149 (https://www.rfc-editor.org/errata/eid3149), ice-mismatch should be
> media level. So, it is a bit of a mess.
>
>
>
> I can change ice-mismatch back to media level, but what we need to clarify
> then is the following: If ice-mismatch is present in the m= line, does it
> stop ICE processing for the whole session or for this m= line only?
>
>
>
> If it stops ICE processing for the whole session then it makes little or
> no sense being specified per m= line. If it only stops processing for
> specific m= line, then ice-mismatch probably also makes sense at the
> session level to stop ICE processing for the whole session.
>
>
>
> I am definitely open to input here.
>
> _____________
>
> Roman Shpount
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
>
> mmusic mailing list
>
> mailto:mmusic@ietf.org
>
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mmusic
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
>
> mmusic mailing list
>
> mailto:mmusic@ietf.org
>
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mmusic
>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
>
> mmusic mailing list
>
> mailto:mmusic@ietf.org
>
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mmusic
>
>
>
>
>
>
>