IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [rtcweb] Resolving RTP/SDES question in Paris

"Ravindran, Parthasarathi" <pravindran@sonusnet.com> Sat, 17 March 2012 04:32 UTC

Return-Path: <pravindran@sonusnet.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 567FE21E800F for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 16 Mar 2012 21:32:01 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -4.789
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.789 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=1.810, 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 Hl78Afhf8x6N for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 16 Mar 2012 21:32:00 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from na3sys010aog114.obsmtp.com (na3sys010aog114.obsmtp.com [74.125.245.96]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1B0EE21E8049 for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Fri, 16 Mar 2012 21:31:51 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from USMA-EX-HUB2.sonusnet.com ([69.147.176.212]) (using TLSv1) by na3sys010aob114.postini.com ([74.125.244.12]) with SMTP ID DSNKT2QTt4Xbe1EpM6XgyYDoa34KLtBtTxS6@postini.com; Fri, 16 Mar 2012 21:31:52 PDT
Received: from INBA-HUB02.sonusnet.com (10.70.51.87) by USMA-EX-HUB2.sonusnet.com (66.203.90.17) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.2.247.3; Sat, 17 Mar 2012 00:32:03 -0400
Received: from INBA-MAIL01.sonusnet.com ([fe80::8d0f:e4f9:a74f:3daf]) by inba-hub02.sonusnet.com ([fe80::80b9:dc60:caf7:7dfc%11]) with mapi id 14.01.0355.002; Sat, 17 Mar 2012 10:01:47 +0530
From: "Ravindran, Parthasarathi" <pravindran@sonusnet.com>
To: Eric Rescorla <ekr@rtfm.com>, Roman Shpount <roman@telurix.com>
Thread-Topic: [rtcweb] Resolving RTP/SDES question in Paris
Thread-Index: AQHM8te6ZBG/XYsMg0C4SE+GOqsWNpZtZpyg///nIgCAAAs3AIAASYaAgABimBA=
Date: Sat, 17 Mar 2012 04:31:46 +0000
Message-ID: <387F9047F55E8C42850AD6B3A7A03C6C0E1FEC37@inba-mail01.sonusnet.com>
References: <4F4759DC.7060303@ericsson.com> <387F9047F55E8C42850AD6B3A7A03C6C0E1FEB69@inba-mail01.sonusnet.com> <CALiegfnkYVEpmPV-zSL_4wOY-HiFZN-qJCQCiioaS=5NaqhLZw@mail.gmail.com> <CAD5OKxvtOAxMBx6xDnyfTnEq76oDEm6uj1xL6wGjjrtKUAHy3g@mail.gmail.com> <CABcZeBNZiotPmCfT53uEo+O0xw4xv6tXW1M_G-3A5BHuncsduA@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CABcZeBNZiotPmCfT53uEo+O0xw4xv6tXW1M_G-3A5BHuncsduA@mail.gmail.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-originating-ip: [121.242.142.186]
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
Cc: "rtcweb@ietf.org" <rtcweb@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [rtcweb] Resolving RTP/SDES question in Paris
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: Sat, 17 Mar 2012 04:32:01 -0000

Ekr,

As Roman mentioned for specific military & prison deployment, some of the Enterprise will also restrict public internet HTTPS usage as it may risk Enterprise business.

Thanks
Partha

>-----Original Message-----
>From: rtcweb-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:rtcweb-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf
>Of Eric Rescorla
>Sent: Saturday, March 17, 2012 9:28 AM
>To: Roman Shpount
>Cc: rtcweb@ietf.org
>Subject: Re: [rtcweb] Resolving RTP/SDES question in Paris
>
>On Fri, Mar 16, 2012 at 4:35 PM, Roman Shpount <roman@telurix.com>
>wrote:
>> On Fri, Mar 16, 2012 at 6:55 PM, Iñaki Baz Castillo <ibc@aliax.net>
>wrote:
>>>
>>> Giving the security responsability to end users as a configurable
>>> option is not a good idea. The world would be much better if the
>>> browsers would not allow plain HTTP, but it's not possible to change
>>> the WWW requeriments and mandate HTTPS given the ammount of plain
>>> HTTP deployments. In contrast, WebRTC does not exist yet so *now* is
>>> the moment to mandate security.
>>>
>>
>> And you imply that the fact that security is most of the times
>> unnecessary and often prohibited, has absolutely nothing to do with
>> using HTTP over HTTPS. If you think people in the military or in
>> prisons do not use web browsers, think again. Requiring secure
>> communications will prevent them from using WebRTC.
>
>This doesn't seem obvious at all. Rather it will require the people who
>wish to access their communications to do so explicitly in the same way
>as enterprises who wish to monitor HTTPS do so now.
>
>-Ekr
>_______________________________________________
>rtcweb mailing list
>rtcweb@ietf.org
>https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rtcweb

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email