IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [rtcweb] WGLC for draft-ietf-rtcweb-ip-handling

Justin Uberti <juberti@google.com> Wed, 07 March 2018 22:36 UTC

Return-Path: <juberti@google.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 8B05D127419 for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 7 Mar 2018 14:36:09 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.709
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.709 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=google.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 Yxc-HKYLU06x for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 7 Mar 2018 14:36:07 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-vk0-x229.google.com (mail-vk0-x229.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400c:c05::229]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 91C41126CBF for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Wed, 7 Mar 2018 14:36:07 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-vk0-x229.google.com with SMTP id f6so2424993vkh.6 for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Wed, 07 Mar 2018 14:36:07 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=38UtrCqcOdt8zTPbmJod2fCrwAAob12riRXE6KiowfQ=; b=AL0Ge2K31l+lAah/YQ9vA04CRYKaUXnyyMm5cesCl+UY9M1rupEoGBLTvQcyJbSZrL JevI5ooPAd3joOMJKYQpMkgoKKQVt7xIfjc57v4ysp13/kcy2937hMOjbtQIfOtnByJe oTDTT1e/TKyCDatxoYvc82lEypkubn4C0Y2sQN5KENtU2n9+AdsN0iNBzQHGIvPqFLXx 4MPc3L1vUbCOY86y2uVdUc3Wzz7CGWUOSQVW3S1zSt83S5dKZpqetKkLS7lvdQRA90C6 b5EBB+5S8qR+Taf470HoIL68J7dDL+ULgAjkFwfg/Ay0pQbtzb7gSPB553WG3KT6dzOy Gm+w==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=38UtrCqcOdt8zTPbmJod2fCrwAAob12riRXE6KiowfQ=; b=qalVOsmHxLSRCemPcUzb4J3yX/l75x9vaddN1yLBa8Z+SHAxKMix7U5CFmd4l0wrDR GG28hHICzyrDR0a/auADlybOu3pbmxszIiP03OO/bFIUTFKSGKGl4Bugyr6UyBQHOqi4 1dVnUbmDkEm4AOqxU9c5IsDhjCUvTktYDRAFOxq3X4y5h8Bsi5ce4NEENu5vS0KMb1E0 P76Sn1xDTwwmWnUd08yx/LrugVXJANQYVvO6hUguEx+/c6tH7T0lNtuKze+CkkQzu/Pl XnbYShjSTCO9jqp93apoxlfDJ+OdrJs6g6DhKN8rVA82jdnWuG2gRNn+q9EShAoW2+eQ eqMQ==
X-Gm-Message-State: APf1xPA5G1rTcIXvuWJTJaN4E+tSUGKeWTGB01oMtAapWaFYJq+jgpO5 5/Z0QCedgk0cUgTVdDY6+GyEobYYVlka/YJH6+logQ==
X-Google-Smtp-Source: AG47ELs4iatO8gbPMrcfFVLdgz0VGJS2JrGJq5GXLlvBCNALMogRJ4hK8GOSJPsgT93GXmgmImb1KQ1zZm4S1iJqgUw=
X-Received: by 10.31.248.195 with SMTP id w186mr17936057vkh.78.1520462166129; Wed, 07 Mar 2018 14:36:06 -0800 (PST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.31.167.206 with HTTP; Wed, 7 Mar 2018 14:35:45 -0800 (PST)
In-Reply-To: <403713b4-31d4-9085-d639-d3f60935ed5a@cs.tcd.ie>
References: <1D5B431C-801E-4F8C-8026-6BCBB72FF478@sn3rd.com> <63282b84-4493-3fcb-a95f-4afe17d96bb6@cs.tcd.ie> <CAOJ7v-1gTq+EEjb+-q-T-pABBW--rpNGegoj_d2_7f7AKGksCA@mail.gmail.com> <403713b4-31d4-9085-d639-d3f60935ed5a@cs.tcd.ie>
From: Justin Uberti <juberti@google.com>
Date: Wed, 07 Mar 2018 14:35:45 -0800
Message-ID: <CAOJ7v-0ED-FK=JmSxBJYfM=PCdgY6kmbiq6aFLcP7OXugG07EA@mail.gmail.com>
To: Stephen Farrell <stephen.farrell@cs.tcd.ie>
Cc: Sean Turner <sean@sn3rd.com>, RTCWeb IETF <rtcweb@ietf.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="94eb2c1495424f12130566da2f63"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/rtcweb/8VqY5gx7809SqBMNgt5lK5QtNVg>
Subject: Re: [rtcweb] WGLC for draft-ietf-rtcweb-ip-handling
X-BeenThere: rtcweb@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
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: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/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: Wed, 07 Mar 2018 22:36:10 -0000

On Wed, Mar 7, 2018 at 1:12 PM, Stephen Farrell <stephen.farrell@cs.tcd.ie>
wrote:

>
> Hiya,
>
> To also be clear: my main objection is to the term consent being
> used at all. The stuff below isn't that big a deal, though would
> change if the WG did drop the idea of "consent" supposedly being
> a real thing.
>
> On 07/03/18 20:47, Justin Uberti wrote:
> > To be clear, the MUST does not say that all interfaces MUST be used if
> > consent is given, rather the converse, that you MUST only use all
> > interfaces if there is consent.
>
> It's unclear to me that there's any practical difference there.
> Are there any implementations that do something else? (Apologies
> if that's clear to everyone else:-)
>
> > In addition, while gUM consent is given as an example, it is not
> normative.
> >
> >    Mode 1 MUST only be used when user consent has been provided.  The
> >    details of this consent are left to the implementation; one potential
> >    mechanism is to tie this consent to getUserMedia consent.
>
> Sure. OTOH, IIUC, that is what's done in web browsers so it kind
> of really is normative, in practice. Again, apologies if there
> are other things done in browsers.
>

I believe that the Brave browser uses Mode 4 in its private browsing mode.
https://github.com/brave/browser-laptop/issues/260

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email