IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [rtcweb] Eric Rescorla's Discuss on draft-ietf-rtcweb-overview-18: (with DISCUSS and COMMENT)

Eric Rescorla <ekr@rtfm.com> Thu, 11 May 2017 13:48 UTC

Return-Path: <ekr@rtfm.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 6E53A12F257 for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 11 May 2017 06:48:42 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.599
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7] autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=rtfm-com.20150623.gappssmtp.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 e09q64ND6sBg for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 11 May 2017 06:48:40 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-yw0-x232.google.com (mail-yw0-x232.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4002:c05::232]) (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 04A9A1300CF for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Thu, 11 May 2017 06:44:33 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-yw0-x232.google.com with SMTP id b68so12682216ywe.3 for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Thu, 11 May 2017 06:44:32 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=rtfm-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=H59RnawMto00ZelAgzXpYWdmNtklaTZ5UAPlvIK8FvI=; b=K27zOAOJs16KzX28Al30zaIX99UmikCAgINmly9qYdSQ81llQHCs5PGoFuKH2MXSLq RwgUAGEUmDiORf5w5GBj3XGE03Gqtm92KLxOo9lPM8jQflW8kRxXx/B78Ld4HjFvDEvW Q9jUjrNzyZvos4CWdmxEJs+gkTtI5KORJNVQWLACYjYP3T9LHZaIgcvH5Qfxt7rxK0QJ E5qylLLH7MeUQXOBSNYyzwoC5KmPthz6gt0g5QizegpL46bHoaLYbQsqOqP3qLOdyD2N wihtuZ9eiNp5uVVpaFWjiwVTZ3MyZSmm6NDdr0poOjLCUz86PUMBXwkGsvcL/3f6YlWl KdfA==
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=H59RnawMto00ZelAgzXpYWdmNtklaTZ5UAPlvIK8FvI=; b=BKFVyj7XeWMmjN+KNkvcJ/ir+ccUc6Hr32/l7kE4Xr1ZGC8Y7h40/JOr0o7s+d+HPB 9gSyBvcqaV4DuGodJRqLBX+oXx858bSTlUlfhs2Occ7SQEYYak6lCxFnIgWvlP/bPSqZ ZUwVeVSKKBkDOPGxCMCws1rU9sgTJFaudi7QdHmxPlKOw4/ME3ZlzJwHVXETzlmquWGQ DY6op6DS2WugBdSflm2NDEAhXuyzKbtdTGKBYGrBp0QNk4oQZDgraYkXLhMJ+H/+6kIN NTVlJ9vhvExLlUBTymCXIgpmbTLXNCw6nAwG3GWF1+VNlnCFJKtbYzi+m9Zy7U0tJZ48 0TKw==
X-Gm-Message-State: AODbwcA0AzL5dphA1Y6BTjyq5FJTQTgGqj1Ocnq8aqbDoNxMlTBwwVms t346jj5U6sb/0zwP5xwUv2SERMu7+A==
X-Received: by 10.13.255.199 with SMTP id p190mr325094ywf.312.1494510272279; Thu, 11 May 2017 06:44:32 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.129.131.150 with HTTP; Thu, 11 May 2017 06:43:51 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <D539F225.1C532%christer.holmberg@ericsson.com>
References: <149285978295.25905.7347383325486705546.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> <7594FB04B1934943A5C02806D1A2204B4CB805F3@ESESSMB109.ericsson.se> <15D737F9-2F65-45C5-AA26-946910B4030F@sn3rd.com> <D539F225.1C532%christer.holmberg@ericsson.com>
From: Eric Rescorla <ekr@rtfm.com>
Date: Thu, 11 May 2017 06:43:51 -0700
Message-ID: <CABcZeBP2f0BRob205nfoeLWn+1KKe6-mw1GRqFbyfwa9Y7B9mg@mail.gmail.com>
To: Christer Holmberg <christer.holmberg@ericsson.com>
Cc: Sean Turner <sean@sn3rd.com>, The IESG <iesg@ietf.org>, "rtcweb-chairs@ietf.org" <rtcweb-chairs@ietf.org>, "rtcweb@ietf.org" <rtcweb@ietf.org>, "draft-ietf-rtcweb-overview@ietf.org" <draft-ietf-rtcweb-overview@ietf.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="94eb2c087eeae49022054f3fc949"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/rtcweb/G014wQtnWqVstJv-kpgGg3VBTZg>
Subject: Re: [rtcweb] Eric Rescorla's Discuss on draft-ietf-rtcweb-overview-18: (with DISCUSS and COMMENT)
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: Thu, 11 May 2017 13:48:43 -0000

Question for the chairs.

On Thu, May 11, 2017 at 12:44 AM, Christer Holmberg <
christer.holmberg@ericsson.com> wrote:

> Hi,
>
> What is the status regarding this?
>
> Regards,
>
> Christer
>
> On 26/04/17 06:02, "Sean Turner" <sean@sn3rd.com> wrote:
>
> >
> >> On Apr 23, 2017, at 14:44, Christer Holmberg
> >><christer.holmberg@ericsson.com> wrote:
> >>
> >> Hi,
> >>
> >>> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> >>> DISCUSS:
> >>> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> >>>
> >>> Your citation to ICE is to 5245-bis, but at least the JSEP editor
> >>>consensus was that WebRTC depended on 5245, so this needs to be
> >>>resolved one way or the other.
> >>
> >> Keep in mind that, no matter what draft-rtcweb-overview and
> >>draft-rtcweb-jsep explicitly say, both specs reference 5245bis
> >>*IMPLICITLY*, e.g., via draft-mmusic-bundle, draft-ice-trickle etc... As
> >>I have indicated in the past, it would cause confusion to reference both.
> >>
> >> So, I think we shall reference 5245-bis everywhere (I also thought we
> >>already decided no that in the past)-
> >>
> >> Regards,
> >>
> >> Christer
> >
> >/* bike shed alert:
> >/*
> >/* Assuming you¹re of the mind that a bis/updates draft is
> >/* signaling to all implementors of the original RFC that the
> >/* intention is that all implementations be updated then it¹s
> >/* a bit more than implicit.
> >
> >spt
> >
>
>

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email