IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Perc] Drop support for E2E RTP header extensions

"Paul E. Jones" <paulej@packetizer.com> Sun, 14 May 2017 00:10 UTC

Return-Path: <paulej@packetizer.com>
X-Original-To: perc@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: perc@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6303312DFDB for <perc@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 13 May 2017 17:10:52 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.003
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.003 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.001, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=packetizer.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 tnGg31Up5Dvf for <perc@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 13 May 2017 17:10:50 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from dublin.packetizer.com (dublin.packetizer.com [75.101.130.125]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 8B507129515 for <perc@ietf.org>; Sat, 13 May 2017 17:08:35 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [192.168.1.20] (cpe-098-122-167-029.nc.res.rr.com [98.122.167.29] (may be forged)) (authenticated bits=0) by dublin.packetizer.com (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTPSA id v4E08XCe030070 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NO); Sat, 13 May 2017 20:08:34 -0400
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=packetizer.com; s=dublin; t=1494720514; bh=0BfE3K75b0du6Ywvs1vF9f0degq6LRngkilXq7m/CrU=; h=From:To:Subject:Cc:Date:In-Reply-To:References:Reply-To; b=O66ulo+STCHJ7oE1fiqEprRou0ar9UICvN7Edp5JOaFF6LY++Fp89hyl0d1zeekfH EZytC5rRT9MPQfSFFUX0rsIurumu6r+NN0cq1VWeD4mjI8VED26GwVqSOWELjbpzng xcL6NymqpMDQuQxzgSWxkF90Pl/Xc6tMZ8maZxcA=
From: "Paul E. Jones" <paulej@packetizer.com>
To: Cullen Jennings <fluffy@iii.ca>
Cc: perc@ietf.org
Date: Sun, 14 May 2017 00:08:35 +0000
Message-Id: <em9a829f3a-e2ed-4250-8e7e-cad6623a30a2@sydney>
In-Reply-To: <2810AD6C-0F45-41CC-BC6F-4303B5649CB0@iii.ca>
References: <49c7de34-8bc6-bb7d-4524-0af26089eecb@gmail.com> <1CF6F66C-939F-484D-8C53-46ACB8CA69BE@vidyo.com> <27ca2993-5c66-8388-7187-b47ed8ae1340@gmail.com> <CAL02cgRDaz7BT+GzxWJ0cM7rebhd2cu2WbPy+Mwjkk0wJK=6mw@mail.gmail.com> <aef9a32f-f761-c9e8-de99-57c4acfd5088@gmail.com> <8FD07F5D-CD52-445B-AF75-BA1696F3A151@mozilla.com> <aff1a9bf-7dcb-71e6-3d01-afe5cac87ca5@gmail.com> <E234DDC1-9AB5-4C64-91C0-A8FCB58DA351@iii.ca> <8ddbf495-ac23-8529-aa0b-a233a0b336c0@gmail.com> <74BE8407-9AC0-45D3-9476-5C109A7B7A3C@iii.ca> <286A6294-EC1E-49D3-88BB-023178DB07BD@packetizer.com> <2810AD6C-0F45-41CC-BC6F-4303B5649CB0@iii.ca>
Reply-To: "Paul E. Jones" <paulej@packetizer.com>
User-Agent: eM_Client/7.0.30068.0
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; format="flowed"; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-Greylist: Sender succeeded SMTP AUTH, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.6.1 (dublin.packetizer.com [10.165.122.250]); Sat, 13 May 2017 20:08:34 -0400 (EDT)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/perc/8w2DJx6JGZ0d5hIYYb1LTjMOi78>
Subject: Re: [Perc] Drop support for E2E RTP header extensions
X-BeenThere: perc@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
Precedence: list
List-Id: Privacy Enhanced RTP Conferencing <perc.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/perc>, <mailto:perc-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/perc/>
List-Post: <mailto:perc@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:perc-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/perc>, <mailto:perc-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 14 May 2017 00:10:52 -0000

Cullen,

I say we should NOT support E2E extensions.  Make them HBH and the MDD 
can re-write header extensions values or remove them as it sees fit.

Sergio, you want E2E extensions?  Seems like it's going to be rather 
complicated to support with the current design.

Paul

------ Original Message ------
From: "Cullen Jennings" <fluffy@iii.ca>
To: "Paul Jones" <paulej@packetizer.com>
Cc: perc@ietf.org
Sent: 5/13/2017 10:33:35 AM
Subject: Re: [Perc] Drop support for E2E RTP header extensions

>
>
>>  On May 12, 2017, at 12:10 AM, Paul E. Jones <paulej@packetizer.com> 
>>wrote:
>>
>>  I don't see how we can support any E2E extension given the offerer 
>>specifies the ID mapping. Multiple endpoints in a conference might 
>>indicate any number of didn't ID values for the same extension.
>>
>
>
>Just so we are all clear on how this would work ... sorry for the 
>repetition ....
>
>
>If Alice's UA offers urn:ietf:params:rtp-hdrext:encrypt with and ID of 
>1 and the conferences wants to use 22 because that is what other 
>endpoints are using, the conference server simply rejects that in the 
>answer then does and reoffers that with an ID of 22.
>
>This of course does not take care of Sergio request that the conference 
>bridge would like to tell ALice's UA if this should be protected E2E or 
>not. I'll send a separate email on that.
>
>
>_______________________________________________
>Perc mailing list
>Perc@ietf.org
>https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/perc

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email