Re: [MMUSIC] Bundling data channel and RTP?

Paul Kyzivat <pkyzivat@alum.mit.edu> Mon, 25 May 2015 16:17 UTC

Return-Path: <pkyzivat@alum.mit.edu>
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 C28351AC3B6 for <mmusic@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 25 May 2015 09:17:03 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.235
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.235 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, SPF_SOFTFAIL=0.665] 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 3qzzu9WjSU4f for <mmusic@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 25 May 2015 09:17:02 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from resqmta-ch2-09v.sys.comcast.net (resqmta-ch2-09v.sys.comcast.net [IPv6:2001:558:fe21:29:69:252:207:41]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id DF2441AC3B4 for <mmusic@ietf.org>; Mon, 25 May 2015 09:17:01 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from resomta-ch2-20v.sys.comcast.net ([69.252.207.116]) by resqmta-ch2-09v.sys.comcast.net with comcast id YGGz1q0032XD5SV01GH1yH; Mon, 25 May 2015 16:17:01 +0000
Received: from Paul-Kyzivats-MacBook-Pro.local ([50.138.229.151]) by resomta-ch2-20v.sys.comcast.net with comcast id YGH01q00E3Ge9ey01GH0cu; Mon, 25 May 2015 16:17:01 +0000
Message-ID: <55634AFB.3030606@alum.mit.edu>
Date: Mon, 25 May 2015 12:16:59 -0400
From: Paul Kyzivat <pkyzivat@alum.mit.edu>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.10; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.7.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: mmusic@ietf.org
References: <5540C9BA.4090803@nteczone.com> <555D251A.4020004@nteczone.com> <555DA696.4040109@ericsson.com> <555ED8A4.9080601@nteczone.com> <7594FB04B1934943A5C02806D1A2204B1D84AF09@ESESSMB209.ericsson.se>
In-Reply-To: <7594FB04B1934943A5C02806D1A2204B1D84AF09@ESESSMB209.ericsson.se>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1252"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=comcast.net; s=q20140121; t=1432570621; bh=d4FxC6543Dt5WRv5V7nRIq99qiGIas4KYHJXqusen0w=; h=Received:Received:Message-ID:Date:From:MIME-Version:To:Subject: Content-Type; b=bD7u+N1p/cSoRYNy168oE/TW8UMhkgWP9Ho4lV9vLV7h7SyIvSwNVcVbzs7PiP/pA alYWlu3YxCU4U11yKE5EDrT8/V0aEkoNLfVl516XTrTfELRjL7IGKZR1TNrpnF3eKm pYqglyKI15Zb0No+dYrBK+3vuFZYW1Qw5bf8Cb28xx2DUH4hEX9V3PeH0DLQYBEt4M imPj/9Y1OQ/j60HNfbFkI8LgjJ5pGXtUZoWX1kKkooXS9V8YSPdZpIC6Uo+9Elrf5R HGHKHq48ypSnUmMnkJZvDvt7yHp/8KuzoPbDRjVURA3RefmRN68Ygm/LwCMbLVmCmx Sa1ueEw4j38VQ==
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/mmusic/reQvL4QSx8gPVFWK5ytpXZM73PM>
Subject: Re: [MMUSIC] Bundling data channel and RTP?
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, 25 May 2015 16:17:03 -0000

On 5/24/15 9:59 PM, Christer Holmberg wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I wonder whether we should have a "DTLS considerations" section in BUNDLE, and specify that all bundled media MUST use the same DTLS connection for key management, encryption etc.

Yes, that makes sense.

> Would it even be possible to establish multiple DTLS connections on a single 5-tuple?

I don't think so.

Note that RTP is "special" in this regard, in that it uses DTLS for the 
keying, but it doesn't use DTLS payload packets.

If there were more than one m-line that used DTLS payload packets then 
they would also have to specify how to multiplex among them. AFAIK there 
is currently no way to do that, so there can only be one m-line that 
uses DTLS payload packets.

	Thanks,
	Paul

> Regards,
>
> Christer
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: mmusic [mailto:mmusic-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Christian Groves
> Sent: 22 May 2015 10:20
> To: mmusic@ietf.org
> Subject: Re: [MMUSIC] Bundling data channel and RTP?
>
> Hello Magnus and Martin,
>
> Thanks for confirming that.
>
> It would be good to cover bundling the SRTP and DTLS/SCTP m-lines the BUNDLE and JSEP drafts.
>
> Regards, Christian
>
>
>
> On 20 May 2015 at 17:21, Christian Groves<Christian.Groves@nteczone.com>  wrote:
>
>> Can anyone confirm the intention that a single DTLS connection is used
>> for SRTP key exchange and also SCTP packets?
>
> Yes, the record layer carries SCTP and exporters from the same session are used to key SRTP.
>
>
>
> On 21/05/2015 7:34 PM, Magnus Westerlund wrote:
>> Christian Groves skrev den 2015-05-21 02:21:
>>> Can anyone confirm the intention that a single DTLS connection is
>>> used for SRTP key exchange and also SCTP packets?
>>>
>>> draft-ietf-rtcweb-transports-08 indicates:
>>>
>>> /WebRTC implementations MUST support multiplexing of DTLS and RTP over//
>>> //   the same port pair, as described in the DTLS_SRTP specification//
>>> //   [RFC5764], section 5.1.2.  All application layer protocol
>>> payloads//
>>> //   over this DTLS connection are SCTP packets./
>>>
>>> To me this implies a single DTLS connection. However in RFC5764
>>> clause
>>> 4.1 it says:
>>> /Once the "use_srtp" extension is negotiated, the RTP or RTCP//
>>> //   application data is protected solely using SRTP. Application
>>> data is//
>>> //   never sent in DTLS record-layer "application_data" packets.
>>> Rather,//
>>> //   complete RTP or RTCP packets are passed to the DTLS stack, which//
>>> //   passes them to the SRTP stack, which protects them appropriately.//
>>> /
>>> In the second sentence "application data" is not qualified with "RTP
>>> or RTCP" so it could be taken that its not possible to use the DTLS
>>> connection for anything else. However I take it that as the rest of
>>> the paragraph talks about RTP or RTCP that these were meant when
>>> application data is mentioned?
>>>
>>> Can only one add some clarity?
>>>
>>
>> Yes, that is clearly the intention as I understand it in WebRTC.
>>
>> Cheers
>>
>> Magnus Westerlund
>>
>> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>> Services, Media and Network features, Ericsson Research EAB/TXM
>> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>> Ericsson AB                 | Phone  +46 10 7148287
>> Färögatan 6                 | Mobile +46 73 0949079
>> SE-164 80 Stockholm, Sweden | mailto: magnus.westerlund@ericsson.com
>> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>>
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> mmusic mailing list
> mmusic@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mmusic
>
> _______________________________________________
> mmusic mailing list
> mmusic@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mmusic
>