Re: [rtcweb] Consent alternative

Martin Thomson <martin.thomson@gmail.com> Fri, 22 November 2013 18:44 UTC

Return-Path: <martin.thomson@gmail.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 8238D1AE393 for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 22 Nov 2013 10:44:11 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, 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 mz6lIBrpjVQm for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 22 Nov 2013 10:44:10 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-wg0-x22d.google.com (mail-wg0-x22d.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:400c:c00::22d]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3995E1AE0A4 for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Fri, 22 Nov 2013 10:44:09 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-wg0-f45.google.com with SMTP id a1so1544651wgh.0 for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Fri, 22 Nov 2013 10:44:01 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; bh=cGzawFLUjthVTBWeujpFrS4kfDqeAAWpUX/8seZfEt0=; b=Ud3SplrLhnSMyPxN7+qktj/LzEi50MBVBaMaSEy7AnWbOdTgxOIQnzZ6Ieoe0x+7Ah y4G93++m6Sam7MAGZksZAVZKXlYjv1wKGVkSH1QLvwQjIWTrUWF9Gc1ughJ+i+IQAuOK LyinhO+WLqyzc8qR4gISSNq4rFaM2dSybiczfu+WPxjroYbKoo61VchC13Pn+G5VTjaj GpkFkVxerDBP+pkk3IaEoJvKRGu2NwOCSwCIxypqN/zsRow8fWihxixD73neUfxcWzqW gUscs+90VgKuFw5K3K/p9ghjjmgD8XhASY8JhROOf+CBuEuc9UvRaC8awddRaxTJGuoO afCA==
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.180.20.102 with SMTP id m6mr3850482wie.22.1385145841710; Fri, 22 Nov 2013 10:44:01 -0800 (PST)
Received: by 10.227.134.195 with HTTP; Fri, 22 Nov 2013 10:44:01 -0800 (PST)
In-Reply-To: <7ACE36C2-EE49-4EBB-999A-71F92430F8E3@phonefromhere.com>
References: <CABkgnnVNnT8uoWM8T=TqbTmy11CGTeHLP=_7z5KSMSpAsp9SyQ@mail.gmail.com> <9E5D7D59-0536-469E-8CB7-440FF27F0B41@phonefromhere.com> <BLU169-W84AAFA395B7844922F472C93E00@phx.gbl> <7ACE36C2-EE49-4EBB-999A-71F92430F8E3@phonefromhere.com>
Date: Fri, 22 Nov 2013 10:44:01 -0800
Message-ID: <CABkgnnXbz8XBFB1qEGXrpu7v+hkZeWn3FDDFMWgGNWNM8wiFSg@mail.gmail.com>
From: Martin Thomson <martin.thomson@gmail.com>
To: tim panton <tim@phonefromhere.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Cc: Cullen Jennings <fluffy@cisco.com>, "rtcweb@ietf.org" <rtcweb@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [rtcweb] Consent alternative
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: Fri, 22 Nov 2013 18:44:11 -0000

On 22 November 2013 10:41, tim panton <tim@phonefromhere.com> wrote:
> The ICE mechanism is clearer - you send the packets anyway with no dependency on whatever else has been sent.

If you can tolerate the additional overhead, send a heartbeat when
your timer pops.  We're not prohibiting it.  It's just suboptimal.

> I also need to think about how RTCP plays into this (which isn’t mentioned in the draft, and probably should be).

Someone already pointed that out to me.  RTCP is authenticated just
like RTP, so if they are on the same flow, they both refresh consent.
If they are on separate flows, consent is independent.