IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [rtcweb] WG Last Call for draft-ietf-rtcweb-stun-consent-freshness

Roman Shpount <roman@telurix.com> Mon, 25 August 2014 14:49 UTC

Return-Path: <roman@telurix.com>
X-Original-To: rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id ACC331A8986 for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 25 Aug 2014 07:49:13 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.978
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.978 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, FM_FORGED_GMAIL=0.622, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham
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 zx-DSuhAFA6K for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 25 Aug 2014 07:49:12 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-wi0-f179.google.com (mail-wi0-f179.google.com [209.85.212.179]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 03A6B1A8974 for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Mon, 25 Aug 2014 07:49:11 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-wi0-f179.google.com with SMTP id f8so2653216wiw.12 for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Mon, 25 Aug 2014 07:49:10 -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; bh=MdHCll/nXsH8W5o5FhkyRK2RlXTn5S8PcQtIAbWh090=; b=NzeY3S5YSJHm4m4jhJoMbBBc095IZgMZoih9ieAeQlBW/aDexMLkSkCtUvC09jiKi8 zbVc5X3TzRoO4yGuSUVtN/21DmdEs+EVtPXCNZIrDej/GPeyCP85V4DjvpWAQVXKoyUe imn3DarIqpA5l+cGerWO4r7yDw4Y8CpePkOjWh1zAQW4huurYjFxW0xvBvDpEjIl8+uv c8Ibku8uRYT52aIOYVCnemMSkkpnBB+DnUDfhpxXUpWQReXwZDImuY3cs0vzpdDu08tW Q+uqBpYT5tL62vHopoqWtbVPRacJwmpcKHRld1Ss4Hw1ppKzbLVexFwtFGkPPYUlvvvn UJJQ==
X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQltgChy4trnF6J4sy8LHH/SPgvhmrQbW0SFnbHm0nbnQ/NBRpFF8NQiC/y7dH1DSz2JKdIa
X-Received: by 10.194.203.8 with SMTP id km8mr23601004wjc.51.1408978150588; Mon, 25 Aug 2014 07:49:10 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-wi0-f182.google.com (mail-wi0-f182.google.com [209.85.212.182]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPSA id fy1sm1426589wic.6.2014.08.25.07.49.09 for <rtcweb@ietf.org> (version=TLSv1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA bits=128/128); Mon, 25 Aug 2014 07:49:09 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-wi0-f182.google.com with SMTP id d1so2653156wiv.9 for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Mon, 25 Aug 2014 07:49:09 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.180.38.84 with SMTP id e20mr15680287wik.43.1408978149118; Mon, 25 Aug 2014 07:49:09 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.216.20.7 with HTTP; Mon, 25 Aug 2014 07:49:09 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <CAKz0y8ws+ARTZaVRpMBcRc_mmc_8cEHdurt=nQ39xdSwtNPPRw@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAKz0y8ws+ARTZaVRpMBcRc_mmc_8cEHdurt=nQ39xdSwtNPPRw@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 25 Aug 2014 10:49:09 -0400
Message-ID: <CAD5OKxs9=YPZGUzQxHkuP8KQA6iV_ntJ8PWKtyJa9tioMhBBuA@mail.gmail.com>
From: Roman Shpount <roman@telurix.com>
To: Muthu Arul Mozhi Perumal <muthu.arul@gmail.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="e89a8f643366131c190501754a23"
Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/rtcweb/4v3LW1_sC-cF8xhdidyB4Caeef8
Cc: "rtcweb@ietf.org" <rtcweb@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [rtcweb] WG Last Call for draft-ietf-rtcweb-stun-consent-freshness
X-BeenThere: rtcweb@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
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: Mon, 25 Aug 2014 14:49:13 -0000

On Mon, Aug 25, 2014 at 10:33 AM, Muthu Arul Mozhi Perumal <
muthu.arul@gmail.com> wrote:

> An ICE-lite entity by definition doesn't generate STUN requests which
> means it doesn't perform consent freshness as described in the draft. If it
> does, it is not a ICE-lite entity. You have only two types of entities to
> interop test with. I don't see any use of specifying a MUST NOT for
> ICE-lite.
>
>
>
This is exactly what I am saying. All full ICE end points for WebRTC must
implement consent freshness. We should not specify consent freshness for
ICE-lite (as it is not specified right now), and we should not define a
special type of end points which will not send consent freshness requests
just because they are ICE-lite (since they already cannot send it).
_____________
Roman Shpount

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email