Return-Path: 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 9DBD621F8935 for ; Thu, 2 May 2013 06:02:39 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -6.173 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.173 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.075, BAYES_00=-2.599, HELO_EQ_SE=0.35, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id uyOFCnHass36 for ; Thu, 2 May 2013 06:02:34 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mailgw2.ericsson.se (mailgw2.ericsson.se [193.180.251.37]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E130F21F8523 for ; Thu, 2 May 2013 06:02:25 -0700 (PDT) X-AuditID: c1b4fb25-b7f396d000007d06-af-518263e0aba4 Received: from ESESSHC016.ericsson.se (Unknown_Domain [153.88.253.125]) by mailgw2.ericsson.se (Symantec Mail Security) with SMTP id 18.13.32006.0E362815; Thu, 2 May 2013 15:02:25 +0200 (CEST) Received: from ESESSMB209.ericsson.se ([169.254.9.167]) by ESESSHC016.ericsson.se ([153.88.183.66]) with mapi id 14.02.0328.009; Thu, 2 May 2013 15:02:24 +0200 From: Christer Holmberg To: "Mo Zanaty (mzanaty)" Thread-Topic: [MMUSIC] BUNDLE: mandate RTP/RTCP multiplexing? Thread-Index: Ac5FpkrHryzI/aQNT0iUvXy00zH5hwADtcYAAAPFvoAAAQhZgAA4imSAABwqMXAABklLyAAANmRg Date: Thu, 2 May 2013 13:02:23 +0000 Message-ID: <7594FB04B1934943A5C02806D1A2204B1C3699A8@ESESSMB209.ericsson.se> References: <7594FB04B1934943A5C02806D1A2204B1C368E12@ESESSMB209.ericsson.se> <517FFB7E.8050801@alum.mit.edu> <51801BBD.1010505@alum.mit.edu> , <7594FB04B1934943A5C02806D1A2204B1C369709@ESESSMB209.ericsson.se> In-Reply-To: Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: x-originating-ip: [153.88.183.20] Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_7594FB04B1934943A5C02806D1A2204B1C3699A8ESESSMB209erics_" MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Brightmail-Tracker: H4sIAAAAAAAAA+NgFvrNLMWRmVeSWpSXmKPExsUyM+Jvre7D5KZAg0VtTBZbpwpZTF3+mMXi xYM5TBYrNhxgdWDx+Pv+A5PHlN8bWT0WbCr1WLLkJ1MASxS3TVJiSVlwZnqevl0Cd8al5mXs Ba+yKs51rmJrYPwV18XIySEhYCLxcvsNZghbTOLCvfVsXYxcHEIChxklHiydAOUsZpRYdrkZ yOHgYBOwkOj+pw3SICKgK/Hu9zNGEJtZoFii7exCFhBbWMBGomnHTmaIGluJKfdusEPYURL/ f25gBbFZBFQklvxtBavnFfCV6Ng0hxli1xRmiXu/Z4AlOIGaW+Z/ArMZga77fmoNE8QycYlb T+YzQVwtILFkz3moD0QlXj7+xwphK0pcnb6cCeRmZoF8iZuPbSF2CUqcnPmEZQKj6Cwkk2Yh VM1CUgVRoiOxYPcnNghbW2LZwtfMMPaZA4+ZkMUXMLKvYmTPTczMSS832sQIjLuDW36r7mC8 c07kEKM0B4uSOG8yV2OgkEB6YklqdmpqQWpRfFFpTmrxIUYmDk4QwSXVwBi4UDX4kBxzGs+d 6vXHzPacTPlqWMGwckZ6n8+0lZwPBJV2Rvx6FaEhG3HL+M2BDA/pivuCbwy+3bbUy10h/nuZ ypXp3w4dm923etXnBg4uGf6sOqa2bWzPzLcu0f7ytsr+XMOpZ5sjHF+2OafPkri24U7E4Xnz 1toHinVHJveqs6TedF1iWqTEUpyRaKjFXFScCADnLwi9jgIAAA== Cc: "mmusic@ietf.org" , Paul Kyzivat Subject: Re: [MMUSIC] BUNDLE: mandate RTP/RTCP multiplexing? X-BeenThere: mmusic@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Multiparty Multimedia Session Control Working Group List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 02 May 2013 13:02:39 -0000 --_000_7594FB04B1934943A5C02806D1A2204B1C3699A8ESESSMB209erics_ Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hi, In fact, I noticed that, in the second offer, BUNDLE already mandates it in= both the offer and answer :) So, the only addition would be to mandate it also in the first answer. Regards, Christer From: Mo Zanaty (mzanaty) [mailto:mzanaty@cisco.com] Sent: 2. toukokuuta 2013 15:55 To: Christer Holmberg Cc: Justin Uberti; Paul Kyzivat; mmusic@ietf.org Subject: Re: [MMUSIC] BUNDLE: mandate RTP/RTCP multiplexing? +1 for MUST in offer and answer. On May 2, 2013, at 6:01 AM, "Christer Holmberg" > wrote: Hi, Things would certainly work with separate RTCP ports. But, it would mean an= additional 5-tuple, with associated ICE etc, which is what we want to avoi= d by using BUNDLE. And, as BUNDLE already mandates the SDP offerer to offer rtcp-mux, my sugge= stion is to mandate the SDP answerer to accept it (assuming it enables BUND= LE, that is). However, if people have issues with a MUST, a compromise would be "SHOULD, = unless some mechanism explicitly requires the usage of separate RTCP ports"= ... or something like that. Regards, Christer From: mmusic-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:mmusi= c-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Justin Uberti Sent: 2. toukokuuta 2013 1:29 To: Paul Kyzivat Cc: mmusic@ietf.org Subject: Re: [MMUSIC] BUNDLE: mandate RTP/RTCP multiplexing? +1 to mandating rtcp-mux when BUNDLEing. Otherwise, we have weird situations, such as if you try to BUNDLE a SCTP se= ssion and a non-RTCP-mux RTP session together; the former has 1 ICE compone= nt, the latter has 2. On Tue, Apr 30, 2013 at 12:30 PM, Paul Kyzivat > wrote: On 4/30/13 3:00 PM, Martin Thomson wrote: On 30 April 2013 10:12, Paul Kyzivat > wrote: What are the implications of *not* mandating it? I'm more interesting in learning why someone might want to split it out. I can't see any reason for doing that... ...that is, except perhaps for some of the fictitious attacks I invent when someone suggests that RTCP is a good place for a security mechanism of one sort or other. Well, IIUC it was separate before there was a way to combine them. Why was that? Why hasn't separate RTCP gone away entirely? Thanks, Paul _______________________________________________ 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 --_000_7594FB04B1934943A5C02806D1A2204B1C3699A8ESESSMB209erics_ Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Hi,

 <= /p>

In fact, I noticed that, = in the second offer, BUNDLE already mandates it in both the offer and answe= r :)

 <= /p>

So, the only addition wou= ld be to mandate it also in the first answer.

 <= /p>

Regards,

 <= /p>

Christer

 <= /p>

From: Mo Zanat= y (mzanaty) [mailto:mzanaty@cisco.com]
Sent: 2. toukokuuta 2013 15:55
To: Christer Holmberg
Cc: Justin Uberti; Paul Kyzivat; mmusic@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [MMUSIC] BUNDLE: mandate RTP/RTCP multiplexing?

 

+1 for MUST in offer and answer.



On May 2, 2013, at 6:01 AM, "Christer Holmberg" <christer.holmberg@ericsson.com>= wrote:

Hi,

 <= /p>

Things would certainly wo= rk with separate RTCP ports. But, it would mean an additional 5-tuple, with= associated ICE etc, which is what we want to avoid by using BUNDLE.

 <= /p>

And, as BUNDLE already ma= ndates the SDP offerer to offer rtcp-mux, my suggestion is to mandate the S= DP answerer to accept it (assuming it enables BUNDLE, that is).

 <= /p>

However, if people have i= ssues with a MUST, a compromise would be “SHOULD, unless some mechani= sm explicitly requires the usage of separate RTCP ports”… or so= mething like that.

 <= /p>

Regards,

 <= /p>

Christer

 <= /p>

From: mmusic-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:mmusic-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Justin Uberti
Sent: 2. toukokuuta 2013 1:29
To: Paul Kyzivat
Cc: mmusic@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [MMUSIC] BUNDLE: mandate RTP/RTCP multiplexing?<= o:p>

 

+1 to mandating rtcp-mux when BUNDLEing.

 

Otherwise, we have weird situations, such as if you = try to BUNDLE a SCTP session and a non-RTCP-mux RTP session together; the f= ormer has 1 ICE component, the latter has 2.

 

On Tue, Apr 30, 2013 at 12:30 PM, Paul Kyzivat <<= a href=3D"mailto:pkyzivat@alum.mit.edu" target=3D"_blank">pkyzivat@alum.mit= .edu> wrote:

On 4/30/13 3:00 PM, Martin Thomson wrote:=

On 30 April 2013 10:12, Paul Kyzivat <pkyzivat@alum.mit.edu&g= t; wrote:

What are the implications of *not* mandating it?


I'm more interesting in learning why someone might want to split it
out.  I can't see any reason for doing that...

...that is, except perhaps for some of the fictitious attacks I invent
when someone suggests that RTCP is a good place for a security
mechanism of one sort or other.

 

Well, IIUC it was separate before there was a way to= combine them.
Why was that? Why hasn't separate RTCP gone away entirely?

        Thanks,
        Paul


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

 

_______________________________________________
mmusic mailing list
mmusic@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.o= rg/mailman/listinfo/mmusic

--_000_7594FB04B1934943A5C02806D1A2204B1C3699A8ESESSMB209erics_--