Re: [rtcweb] Traffic should be encrypted. (Re: Let's define the purpose of WebRTC)

Justin Uberti <juberti@google.com> Tue, 15 November 2011 13:59 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 6E7C021F8D50 for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 15 Nov 2011 05:59:33 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -102.931
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.931 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.045, BAYES_00=-2.599, FM_FORGED_GMAIL=0.622, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
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 BU5sVsP8IbHz for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 15 Nov 2011 05:59:32 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-iy0-f172.google.com (mail-iy0-f172.google.com [209.85.210.172]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9EC3E21F8D3E for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Tue, 15 Nov 2011 05:59:32 -0800 (PST)
Received: by iaeo4 with SMTP id o4so10950107iae.31 for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Tue, 15 Nov 2011 05:59:32 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=beta; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc:content-type:x-system-of-record; bh=XrUJWMxsBK8KoaXzsc5n3oQDh9GLOV3rCjPDzFgCz2k=; b=RwWOlpBlu1sLS8F7VDo6owmr/1CtKZKcvwkDlEFYKLV95hLTIpeaGcl4JM29yyRlsz 3n13M/CMQqiDuzNC/ADQ==
Received: by 10.231.28.106 with SMTP id l42mr6336526ibc.66.1321365572310; Tue, 15 Nov 2011 05:59:32 -0800 (PST)
Received: by 10.231.28.106 with SMTP id l42mr6336519ibc.66.1321365572142; Tue, 15 Nov 2011 05:59:32 -0800 (PST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.231.194.134 with HTTP; Tue, 15 Nov 2011 05:59:10 -0800 (PST)
In-Reply-To: <792ECBD5-493A-4687-BA50-7064C6FFB9BA@phonefromhere.com>
References: <CALiegfkVNVAs_MyU_-4koA4zRwSn1-FwLjY9g_oZVkhi9rSK5Q@mail.gmail.com> <CAD5OKxvQYVKOZF88WLCiRseg-qXQdOpKeDU_t9b-yA2GcDBT-w@mail.gmail.com> <CABcZeBOiPxz_swdaG6Aqoch1WAUtjNh4eOQy1QObCDXT_B8azg@mail.gmail.com> <CAD5OKxtp+LQBRCHgbWdJyrSRcpNQ82i64TJgGtGPrE7+GKcEog@mail.gmail.com> <4EBC3475.90706@alvestrand.no> <CAD5OKxu_-+ZRsqpUBkFSj=tYtOKG0pK3JoQTZHwQGMuBCnp0Gw@mail.gmail.com> <CAD5OKxuaWJ3SBv+0gac6EQy6-Lsb-LS_SBXk5FqObKy4mN6wNg@mail.gmail.com> <CCF4FC92-D5AA-43C8-A0B2-8041C9B8E1BD@edvina.net> <CAD5OKxs-pWwDBjwAu=mQVWRZa4H_YPpzQ31=0qxUUj-pJOErcg@mail.gmail.com> <A2DFC694-DBDF-4DB4-8DE0-DD638C7AF2BE@acmepacket.com> <CALiegfkU1qhLmhY9L373pF7j9zwHipFfu4mAuY49RDTNL7V5Vg@mail.gmail.com> <C11CACFE-FE5A-43F2-8B61-6ABC9965B7FC@acmepacket.com> <CAOJ7v-3w4t0oYKs+01srAmPGziYt6vVZNOQwbpZ7YWUFZtP20w@mail.gmail.com> <CAMujMTyDnS7UHzqHcr=VKD26n2NSmz8wmRUK0E1XomTT6Wujow@mail.gmail.com> <4EC04998.9070300@acm.org> <47BA59C6-6827-4E03-AF79-251403925334@phonefromhere.com> <4EC0D37B.9020207@alvestrand.no> <792ECBD5-493A-4687-BA50-7064C6FFB9BA@phonefromhere.com>
From: Justin Uberti <juberti@google.com>
Date: Tue, 15 Nov 2011 08:59:10 -0500
Message-ID: <CAOJ7v-02c7W+NsyVf=tZZN7muT+H3KcWm1OprCiYFxHFhOp=tg@mail.gmail.com>
To: Tim Panton <tim@phonefromhere.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001517740adc8bc52304b1c6658e
X-System-Of-Record: true
Cc: rtcweb@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [rtcweb] Traffic should be encrypted. (Re: Let's define the purpose of WebRTC)
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, 15 Nov 2011 13:59:33 -0000

On Tue, Nov 15, 2011 at 7:35 AM, Tim Panton <tim@phonefromhere.com> wrote:

>
> On 14 Nov 2011, at 08:38, Harald Alvestrand wrote:
>
> > On 11/14/2011 04:30 PM, Tim Panton wrote:
> >> On 13 Nov 2011, at 22:50, Marc Petit-Huguenin wrote:
> >>
> >>> On 11/13/2011 01:46 PM, Miguel Casas-Sanchez wrote:
> >>>> İt is indeed very interesting to have interoperability with loads of
> systems,
> >>>> but that should (personal opinion) be left to the applications, and
> not be
> >>>> suggested in a standard that everyone will need to parse. So: keep
> standard lean
> >>>> would be my vote (=leave dtmf out) try and focus on mandatory and
> really
> >>>> nice-to-have features.
> >>>> Miguel
> >>> I do not know why you and others are singling out DTMF.  I am no fan
> of building
> >>> stuff around carriers needs myself, but DTMF is a codec, no more, no
> less.  Even
> >>> the fast codec switching mechanism is not special - comfort noise use
> it too,
> >>> and a system that would recognize music and dynamically switch between
> audio and
> >>> MIDI would probably be considered innovative.
> >> Which gives further weight to my argument that we should be exposing
> the codec
> >> as  a javascript object , the we could have a generic 'notification
> from this codec instance'
> >> callback, instead of doing all these legacy hacks as one-off special
> cases.
> > what would the codec object represent?
>
> The publicly useful state of a current codec instance.
>
> Properties like - bitrate, error - rate, width, height, quality
> complexity, sample-rate, quantity available (possible hardware limits...),
> name, SDP stanza (perhaps), current status (initialized etc)
>
> Property change notifiers (if the far end changes what it is sending we
> get a notification here).
>
> Setters for such properties as make sense to set (some might be valid only
> pre-initialization)
>
> codec specific events  (silence detection, tone detect, typing detect ,
> whiteout, dtmf perhaps, movement detection)
>
> And the really controversial one:  an api to allow manipulation of the
> encoded and
> decoded datastreams by inserting filters into the pipeline before or after
> the codec.
> - (Like DMR's streams pre unix SystemV)
>
>
> >
> > The currently proposed API presents a MediaStreamTrack object.
> > How would a codec object relate to the MediaStreamTrack object?
> >
>
> I don't know - let me look at the MediaStreamTrack again and get back to
> you.
>
> > (this is an api discussion, so probably belongs on the W3C list)
>
> Lets keep it here for now and see if anything solid comes of it.
>

Please, at least move this discussion to a new thread.

>
>