Re: [rtcweb] Data channel comments and questions

<Markus.Isomaki@nokia.com> Thu, 29 March 2012 20:36 UTC

Return-Path: <Markus.Isomaki@nokia.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 9425A21E80F5 for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 29 Mar 2012 13:36:59 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -7.799
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-7.799 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-1.200, BAYES_00=-2.599, 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 aDxP3h1q1E7V for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 29 Mar 2012 13:36:59 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mgw-da02.nokia.com (smtp.nokia.com [147.243.128.26]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D059A21E80CD for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Thu, 29 Mar 2012 13:36:58 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from vaebh104.NOE.Nokia.com (vaebh104.europe.nokia.com [10.160.244.30]) by mgw-da02.nokia.com (Sentrion-MTA-4.2.2/Sentrion-MTA-4.2.2) with ESMTP id q2TKauGS002981; Thu, 29 Mar 2012 23:36:57 +0300
Received: from smtp.mgd.nokia.com ([65.54.30.21]) by vaebh104.NOE.Nokia.com over TLS secured channel with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.4675); Thu, 29 Mar 2012 23:36:55 +0300
Received: from 008-AM1MPN1-042.mgdnok.nokia.com ([169.254.2.245]) by 008-AM1MMR1-012.mgdnok.nokia.com ([65.54.30.21]) with mapi id 14.01.0355.003; Thu, 29 Mar 2012 22:36:55 +0200
From: <Markus.Isomaki@nokia.com>
To: <ekr@rtfm.com>
Thread-Topic: [rtcweb] Data channel comments and questions
Thread-Index: Ac0N59ezjOXJpyb5S8y3N1bZlLMXyP//45QA///dtwA=
Date: Thu, 29 Mar 2012 20:36:55 +0000
Message-ID: <E44893DD4E290745BB608EB23FDDB7621B1300@008-AM1MPN1-042.mgdnok.nokia.com>
References: <E44893DD4E290745BB608EB23FDDB7621B12D4@008-AM1MPN1-042.mgdnok.nokia.com> <CABcZeBNF2UFdinTDWJy1Tet5yh1=CsiMt3YHZYAXWJLDvPgNSg@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CABcZeBNF2UFdinTDWJy1Tet5yh1=CsiMt3YHZYAXWJLDvPgNSg@mail.gmail.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-originating-ip: [93.158.46.72]
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 29 Mar 2012 20:36:55.0905 (UTC) FILETIME=[AE75E510:01CD0DEB]
X-Nokia-AV: Clean
Cc: rtcweb@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [rtcweb] Data channel comments and questions
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, 29 Mar 2012 20:36:59 -0000

Hi,

Eric Rescorla [mailto:ekr@rtfm.com] wrote:
>>
>> 3. HTTP tunneling: In practice we are going to need HTTP tunneling last-
>resort option for the data channel as well. If doing so, what will the protocol
>stack look like? Is it SCTP/DTLS/UDP/HTTP/TLS/TCP? Or can we collapse some
>of these layers. I think we'd better.
>
>I don't think I understand point 3. Why would we need HTTP tunneling?
>If we can bring
>up a bidirectional UDP channel, then why would we need to run HTTP over it?
>

Ah, sorry for not being clear. I mean a situation where we can't setup the UDP channel, if one endpoint is for instance in a corporate network from where only HTTP or HTTPS is allowed. So presumably we'd have to support some kind of HTTP or TLS encapsulation/tunneling for the data channel as well, from the endpoint to some kind of relay. But how would the end-to-end data channel look like then? I.e. what would be sent over the tunnel?

>-Ekr

Markus