[rtcweb] Resolving whether to support additional key management methods

Ted Hardie <ted.ietf@gmail.com> Thu, 04 October 2012 15:32 UTC

Return-Path: <ted.ietf@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4EE1B21F8705 for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 4 Oct 2012 08:32:24 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -3.599
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.000, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id C77hZAi+0Gvo for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 4 Oct 2012 08:32:23 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-vc0-f172.google.com (mail-vc0-f172.google.com []) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 627C121F86FE for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Thu, 4 Oct 2012 08:32:13 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-vc0-f172.google.com with SMTP id fl11so854193vcb.31 for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Thu, 04 Oct 2012 08:32:12 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:date:message-id:subject:from:to:content-type; bh=LnvafLt9FSKGBOkIXmZQAWA4asU7WoCYLXAO+dTOXec=; b=YJgxgf7pNPffvgfrQ9ekpScLcZnIrpauVCYOegO99yX/rHWh4SisFuUakF9Ph0gSO9 X3oIzvV9VOV9fGr/UefyyRaDhCMoHVM0N554K9yAEMTPyW7fANdMfgr429M6+7jxukw1 0WEESlFYcmvbsb7WuG4PuKlWGCJLFRJHuJgnrOsS6rWRwJ+YQ6YL5QSI+bWwDV2ONAGM KSkKz72753+DSditLw2iqFOz916a8AjzVuq9vHTAkW9tSNvut0tYuFpQ8iTz6Pc13FdM xOEd9441UPZBsiNPYmOQfS52PtvjiyShtyZGyE9/Z/ZRicr4GMmCPYWrnNNYd+cqDMng 98bA==
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by with SMTP id ks20mr3395486vcb.5.1349364732834; Thu, 04 Oct 2012 08:32:12 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by with HTTP; Thu, 4 Oct 2012 08:32:12 -0700 (PDT)
Date: Thu, 4 Oct 2012 08:32:12 -0700
Message-ID: <CA+9kkMD6vG1e0eqgk75fiu_QFqEDJb6QaEqTTWE9n5LnTmFz_A@mail.gmail.com>
From: Ted Hardie <ted.ietf@gmail.com>
To: rtcweb@ietf.org
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Subject: [rtcweb] Resolving whether to support additional key management methods
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: Thu, 04 Oct 2012 15:32:24 -0000

The Chairs would like to foster resolution of the long-running
discussion of support for additional key management methods, e.g. as
described in draft-ohlsson-rtcweb-sdes-support and the meeting
materials supporting draft-ietf-avtcore-srtp-ekt.   Working group
discussion of this matter is, of course, welcome, but the chairs are
also considering a virtual interim meeting in January of 2013, focused
on this specific topic.  Comments on this plan or on the relevant
approaches is welcome.


Ted, Cullen, Magnus