Re: [rtcweb] Requiring ICE for RTC calls

Roman Shpount <roman@telurix.com> Tue, 27 September 2011 18:35 UTC

Return-Path: <roman@telurix.com>
X-Original-To: rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B302621F8F42 for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 27 Sep 2011 11:35:45 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.642
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.642 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.626, BAYES_00=-2.599, FM_FORGED_GMAIL=0.622, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_BL_SPAMCOP_NET=1.96, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1]
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 fhOVLk+K8tjP for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 27 Sep 2011 11:35:44 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-yx0-f172.google.com (mail-yx0-f172.google.com [209.85.213.172]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A892921F8F3E for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Tue, 27 Sep 2011 11:35:44 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by yxt33 with SMTP id 33so6976287yxt.31 for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Tue, 27 Sep 2011 11:38:30 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.236.155.170 with SMTP id j30mr11728664yhk.19.1317148710558; Tue, 27 Sep 2011 11:38:30 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-gy0-f172.google.com (mail-gy0-f172.google.com [209.85.160.172]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id v28sm34812005yhi.11.2011.09.27.11.38.29 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=OTHER); Tue, 27 Sep 2011 11:38:30 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by gyd12 with SMTP id 12so6818964gyd.31 for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Tue, 27 Sep 2011 11:38:28 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.68.33.130 with SMTP id r2mr38401330pbi.71.1317148708087; Tue, 27 Sep 2011 11:38:28 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.68.55.39 with HTTP; Tue, 27 Sep 2011 11:38:28 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <4E820825.9090101@skype.net>
References: <CAD5OKxtNjmWBz92bRuxka7e-BUpTPgVUvr3ahJGpmZ-U5nuPbQ@mail.gmail.com> <CAD6AjGSmz5T_F+SK2EoBQm6T-iRKp7dd4j8ZAF5JKdbbyomZQA@mail.gmail.com> <CALiegfmO54HC+g9L_DYn4jtXAAbLEvS++qxKa6TNrLDREs9SeA@mail.gmail.com> <4E80984A.903@skype.net> <CALiegfmyvTb57WVooKryS-ubfcg+w5gZ+zfO1zzBLn3609AzaA@mail.gmail.com> <4E809EE6.2050702@skype.net> <2E239D6FCD033C4BAF15F386A979BF510F1087@sonusinmail02.sonusnet.com> <BLU152-W62B7F2AC3F0D5B6E277CB993F00@phx.gbl> <CAD5OKxt=P3jg9N0weFUZLvUYQxyeXa+9YMtpc8wn7osuPQmTpg@mail.gmail.com> <CAD5OKxtVCgiFV_iAYd1w0uZZcS5+gsixOHJ0jGN=0CMdq++kdg@mail.gmail.com> <CAOJ7v-3PrnNyesL+x-mto9Q9djjiJ13QZHXCiGfY1mv3nubrqQ@mail.gmail.com> <CAD5OKxsKTHCuBQdUnGQtGfF7NmZZExLe9Q9B9cNR=483neuHPQ@mail.gmail.com> <CAOJ7v-1rzdmviAnGknVZmrU_TDNoC3NmWd1g6iyx0WzZ4xB3Pw@mail.gmail.com> <4E820825.9090101@skype.net>
Date: Tue, 27 Sep 2011 14:38:28 -0400
Message-ID: <CAD5OKxvmKi3Py0gNcTdREdfS07hA-=f6L+u8KKVgSWztMft9kQ@mail.gmail.com>
From: Roman Shpount <roman@telurix.com>
To: Matthew Kaufman <matthew.kaufman@skype.net>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=bcaec520f611dca6e204adf0941d
Cc: rtcweb@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [rtcweb] Requiring ICE for RTC calls
X-BeenThere: rtcweb@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: Real-Time Communication in WEB-browsers working group list <rtcweb.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/rtcweb>, <mailto:rtcweb-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/rtcweb>
List-Post: <mailto:rtcweb@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:rtcweb-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rtcweb>, <mailto:rtcweb-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 27 Sep 2011 18:35:45 -0000

What about intranet applications that would want to locally call existing IP
phones within the same enterprise? Should we force them to go through a
media gateway as well or should we allow to overwrite this using a policy?

As far as SRTP is concerned, once again we should at least provide a local
policy. Otherwise it would be a real problem to test and debug this.
_____________
Roman Shpount


On Tue, Sep 27, 2011 at 1:30 PM, Matthew Kaufman
<matthew.kaufman@skype.net>wrote;wrote:

> On 9/27/11 10:01 AM, Justin Uberti wrote:
>
>> Neither Google Voice nor Skype (both fairly popular services) send raw RTP
>> directly from the client to a PSTN terminator.
>>
>
> True.
>
>
>  I can't speak for Skype, but Google Voice uses a media gateway for the
>> quality-related reasons I mentioned earlier.
>>
>
> I can't speak for Skype either, but this is a good guess.
>
>
>
>> Since these large-scale services can deploy media gateways, it's clear
>> that this is not a significant impediment.
>>
>
> Agree. I'm not at all sure what the argument is that we need
> existing-PSTN-gateway-**compatible RTP (without SRTP or ICE). If there is
> demand, these gateways will be upgraded to support RTCWeb. If there is not,
> service providers can run intermediate gateways.
>
> Matthew Kaufman
>
>