Re: [MMUSIC] Mirja Kühlewind's Discuss on draft-ietf-mmusic-sctp-sdp-23: (with DISCUSS)

[Eric Rescorla <[e-mail]>]

P.S. I am very familiar with the Firefox implementation of this, and I can
tell you
that it would be very painful to use TLS when TCP was used and DTLS when
UDP is used, and the modest network overhead for using DTLS is, IMO,
a better choice.

-Ekr



On Thu, Feb 16, 2017 at 7:12 AM, Eric Rescorla <[e-mail]> wrote:

>
>
> On Thu, Feb 16, 2017 at 7:05 AM, Mirja Kuehlewind (IETF) <
> [e-mail]> wrote:
>
>> By making the transport stack overly complicated? That really gives me
>> headache…
>>
>
> It doesn't make the transport stack overly complicated. It makes it
> modular. The way
> that this works is that the transport system (typically ICE) provides a
> generic
> transport that appears to be a datagram transport, even if it's actually
> TCP, and
> so the thing on top of it just acts as it if were datagram. This is
> necessary because
> you may actually switch between TCP and UDP during the life of the
> connection.
>
>
> But let me get back the the other question you asked: Is the TCP variant
>> really needed here? Is this implemented or are there any plans to implement
>> that?
>>
>
> I think you misunderstood me. People absolutely intend to carry this data
> over
> TCP (it's basically the best scenario when you have (a) a centralized
> service
> and (b) a UDP-blocking Firewall). We in fact implement this with Firefox.
> The only question is what should appear in the m= proto line.
>
> -Ekr
>
>
>> Mirja
>>
>>
>>
>> > Am 16.02.2017 um 16:02 schrieb Eric Rescorla <[e-mail]>:
>> >
>> > As Christer says. This design is optimized for making the media stack
>> simpler, which
>> > using TLS here would not do.
>> >
>> > -Ekr
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > On Thu, Feb 16, 2017 at 7:00 AM, Christer Holmberg <
>> [e-mail]> wrote:
>> > Hi,
>> >
>> > ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>> > DISCUSS:
>> > ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>> >
>> > >>> Why is this using TCP/DTLS/SCTP instead of TCP/TLS/SCTP?
>> > >>>
>> > >> Because the way it is realized is by transporting SCTP on top of
>> DTLS (as defined in draft-ietf-tsvwg-sctp-dtls-encaps) and
>> > >> transporting DTLS on top of TCP (defined in RFC 4571).
>> > >
>> > > I got this but DTLS is a mapping to use TLS with UDP because UDP is
>> an unreliable datagram transport. If you use TCP, you
>> > > should use TLS. And rfc4571 is not a mapping of DTLS to TCP.
>> >
>> > The framing mechanism of RFC 4571 is used, with DTLS packets sent
>> instead of RTP packets.
>> >
>> > Regards,
>> >
>> > Christer
>> >
>> >
>>
>>
>