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

Sean Turner <sean@sn3rd.com> Tue, 16 May 2017 16:43 UTC

Return-Path: <sean@sn3rd.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 98EA712EC51 for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 16 May 2017 09:43:19 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.7
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.7 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=sn3rd.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 vNgyO7_gPNPm for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 16 May 2017 09:43:11 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-it0-x236.google.com (mail-it0-x236.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4001:c0b::236]) (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 D0A8712EC33 for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Tue, 16 May 2017 09:37:05 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-it0-x236.google.com with SMTP id c15so65688770ith.0 for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Tue, 16 May 2017 09:37:05 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=sn3rd.com; s=google; h=mime-version:subject:from:in-reply-to:date:cc :content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references:to; bh=Z7qEL5CJg0aPT3fSpJvfOmbH1OwKOn8xu1PVBVBZ4pQ=; b=CH7WKDN/VslRelRb9XKJuwIe3CymFHkAJIbh+OurS9QX/G+iFkWwgEkdpM5vPze8cK B3RdJL2CRQJZOmoh9KRlhq7gtcGuv8fcY7xBcRdgvcIkobQuql7e4XVP9MyjfA9LIsB7 Gq0JPsI8gczbbd9GlixjGydiLr+u+nqyeuOlw=
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:subject:from:in-reply-to:date:cc :content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references:to; bh=Z7qEL5CJg0aPT3fSpJvfOmbH1OwKOn8xu1PVBVBZ4pQ=; b=bCX7t7dTpqDpGNSsyKe0b+nwy+KcHCpztkCAGKs8AGFCDltqanCE0/EuQHmbOTu4xK ch3NxBEogSdXE/omYb5T2WLGG9O7p34qNj4wkBC30bpCMjY5gzcoWMe/j3D5Rz1o9lVE tNog0HP2hts2dP4Xf6OvcMutPmvl9VB8IHqKl7MjN06Dir0BlIX4S0/+zCEyCMgQp9cb WfGB+3nxraF9Px9yYhINaVsSpF20RxLl4+jdvCoSjO1wY05jGQcdjnz0k4MF6PHMS6B9 B2/82birbOgqKeEuImDtN0Q1l07sr32WQOyVsDW2Pb5xi4B1o1rVBRWB174/T6VJFVe2 VImA==
X-Gm-Message-State: AODbwcBPf4lHB9f5dCriX2GMGuT/X9Rp2MBsFv1UFI9ap0wXn6+O8y44 6CMxk8J/iBnI8rog
X-Received: by 10.36.193.66 with SMTP id e63mr11532013itg.86.1494952625268; Tue, 16 May 2017 09:37:05 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [5.5.33.114] (vpn.snozzages.com. [204.42.252.17]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id p77sm5211912ioe.3.2017.05.16.09.37.03 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Tue, 16 May 2017 09:37:04 -0700 (PDT)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 10.3 \(3273\))
From: Sean Turner <sean@sn3rd.com>
In-Reply-To: <149285978295.25905.7347383325486705546.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com>
Date: Tue, 16 May 2017 12:37:03 -0400
Cc: The IESG <iesg@ietf.org>, draft-ietf-rtcweb-overview@ietf.org, rtcweb-chairs@ietf.org
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <56868A9A-C993-469F-9F0A-51E756C5FEBB@sn3rd.com>
References: <149285978295.25905.7347383325486705546.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com>
To: Eric Rescorla <ekr@rtfm.com>, RTCWeb IETF <rtcweb@ietf.org>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3273)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/rtcweb/GWdXRIO68FZwVtzzqugnELKeaY8>
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: Tue, 16 May 2017 16:43:19 -0000

> On Apr 22, 2017, at 07:16, Eric Rescorla <ekr@rtfm.com> wrote:
> 
> 
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> 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.

The chairs believe that the overview draft should refer to RFC5245.  There’s nothing in overview that requires a reference to 5245-bis (aka ICE-bis); it’s a definition for an "ICE Agent”.  And, let’s face it overview is going directly into cluster 238.  So instead of arguing about whether to refer ICE or ICE-bis now when overview is going to get stuck anyway let’s let the process run it’s course: if trickle-ICE is going to get done about the same time as ICE-bis then great we can update the references in AUTH48 and if not we can figure out plan B.

I’ve submitted the following PR to change the reference to 5245:

https://github.com/rtcweb-wg/rtcweb-overview/pull/37

> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> COMMENT:
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------


I haven’t yet completed the editorial changes as a result of ekr's comments so I’ll address that in another email.

spt