Re: [MMUSIC] Merging ICE aggressive and regular nomination (was Re: [tram] Comment on draft-williams-peer-redirect-01: might it not converge?)

José Luis Millán <jmillan@aliax.net> Mon, 04 August 2014 09:36 UTC

Return-Path: <jmillan@aliax.net>
X-Original-To: mmusic@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: mmusic@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3241B1B2959 for <mmusic@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 4 Aug 2014 02:36:06 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.678
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.678 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, FM_FORGED_GMAIL=0.622, MIME_8BIT_HEADER=0.3, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7] autolearn=no
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 XMfiV8F2I__U for <mmusic@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 4 Aug 2014 02:36:04 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-lb0-f172.google.com (mail-lb0-f172.google.com [209.85.217.172]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 376E41B2957 for <mmusic@ietf.org>; Mon, 4 Aug 2014 02:36:03 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-lb0-f172.google.com with SMTP id z11so5101797lbi.17 for <mmusic@ietf.org>; Mon, 04 Aug 2014 02:36:01 -0700 (PDT)
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date :message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; bh=HAf2tPnZmQjxHs7eIZU7JJcRtBSIeGqSiDa/XzsCzPU=; b=DygZ0hh0dbuaUOUwjMrKvAvWpdMyaQ6lDwoi6vOGWzsPmy6Pd33kQKggi/sgqZ+LaK wD33LqxLOatI+YKDd+G8FfJi0V+krDh6WnwZEKq77qZlh6hPwtpyU93eYRuKo6a6+ZV7 /HkAbIVx7xpKTDNnjd0fy75cI4wHWAkHGFcTiWW77hrvSElXnUDe6684a4CHv1NdvdjO ZxFq3nihza1P7DkGVqD+uwz1tc3U1h+6RXc8SxGe+ydH42vLhLiYeQikRMEYYlq9UqtJ PO5/s2TfQ39XHxiL2PAVFEMbDzorft7Jv+dw5w5keNj+RunEexRsvDf8CQ82ZvDn92dE jlRw==
X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQkbzIGWrcoicyuZe9b+ndolauKM2fPDKMYj8BVzmZXlY4/2NTBoDcR4fIYrnTiPsGQHQMB2
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.112.173.201 with SMTP id bm9mr20888662lbc.16.1407144961834; Mon, 04 Aug 2014 02:36:01 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.152.37.40 with HTTP; Mon, 4 Aug 2014 02:36:01 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <CABkgnnUjc45wHKK0NEGY5vUrMh7MibeNneEpTq+jW_ix6-33ig@mail.gmail.com>
References: <0DA61D09-6491-4DA4-8B6F-CFED70584A76@vidyo.com> <CAOJ7v-1jLK7dWDkWHKwHJ6qXicZWDNrAqOtw9R=6zAcWzkh5+g@mail.gmail.com> <53D796E5.9040009@jive.com> <2AF26344-DF5D-493C-96BC-80AD7DF35444@vidyo.com> <CAOJ7v-0HEjQQ+j0cAVc5r3Y4LxaoGF7EN2twGG6vTuMmEeragQ@mail.gmail.com> <8D2E9E91-B0B7-4081-B65B-EDAEC4D23A97@vidyo.com> <CAOJ7v-1HzGoUNXjvXph0-8WfpM6-vFJ+yDWhVw1_1grfrVD1Vw@mail.gmail.com> <B2794643-ADB5-4B66-98DC-841990C85437@vidyo.com> <CAPvvaa+oEe=FveAt2GtcG3ut8sVCbQYsr9sVxuHigD+3+oMa0w@mail.gmail.com> <CABkgnnUjc45wHKK0NEGY5vUrMh7MibeNneEpTq+jW_ix6-33ig@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 4 Aug 2014 11:36:01 +0200
Message-ID: <CABw3bnMyTgugLvaLvsYsfoAvpO8KaP=JY1x1TPY3dnHL+pn3Qg@mail.gmail.com>
From: =?UTF-8?B?Sm9zw6kgTHVpcyBNaWxsw6Fu?= <jmillan@aliax.net>
To: Martin Thomson <martin.thomson@gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/mmusic/n6nWnGnpoKqNcro0FsKJmv0JyMw
Cc: Jonathan Lennox <jonathan@vidyo.com>, mmusic <mmusic@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [MMUSIC] Merging ICE aggressive and regular nomination (was Re: [tram] Comment on draft-williams-peer-redirect-01: might it not converge?)
X-BeenThere: mmusic@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
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: Mon, 04 Aug 2014 09:36:06 -0000

Hi,

2014-07-31 0:01 GMT+02:00 Martin Thomson <martin.thomson@gmail.com>om>:
> On 30 July 2014 14:48, Emil Ivov <emcho@jitsi.org> wrote:
>> When it's RTP you don't care where you get it from as long as you do. If
>> it's a DTLS client halo then what do you do exactly?
>>
>> Can the controlling agent simply respond on a different valid pair than the
>> one on which it received it? (This is what Chrome currently does but its
>> frowned upon by the DTLS/SRTP draft which binds the context to a specific
>> address:port). Does the controlled agent need to resend it on the new pair
>> after it gets the USE-CANDIDATE?
>
> RFC 5764 says this:
>    A single DTLS-SRTP session only protects data carried over
>    a single UDP source and destination port pair.
>
> But I'll postulate that this is only because the alternative (a
> shifting substrate) was not yet conceived.  There is nothing in (D)TLS
> that requires anything of the underlying transport protocol,
> intentionally.  (c.f., tcpinc wg)
>
> Firefox code seems to be OK (at least superficially) with the idea
> that packets can arrive from anywhere.  However, I can see why some
> implementations might get sad if things shift around.

Do you mean that some implementations might get sad because this is
something they simply do not support today (managing a single DTLS
connection with data coming form different underlying transport
protocols) or that doing it leads to any backward compatibility issue?

>
> _______________________________________________
> mmusic mailing list
> mmusic@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mmusic



-- 
José Luis Millán