Re: [rtcweb] WGLC for draft-ietf-rtcweb-ip-handling

[Lennart Grahl <[e-mail]>]

I really don't have a good suggestion other than being completely
honest: "Hey user, I want to establish a direct connection - is that
okay for you? Oh, and here is a help page that will tell you what impact
this may have on your privacy..."

These permission requests don't have to be mutually exclusive either.
The above request could also be embedded inside the permission request
for getUserMedia to avoid multiple requests:

Camera to share:
[WebCam 3000 |v]
:WebCam 3000   :
:WebCam 4000   :

Direct connection: (?) <-- "help" button
[No (Default)                    |v]
:Yes                               :
:Yes, but hide private addresses   :
:No (Default)                      :
:No, and force using a proxy       :

[x] Remember the decision for this page

[Don't allow] [Allow]

Cheers
Lennart

On 31.03.2018 00:12, Sean Turner wrote:
> 
> 
>> On Mar 29, 2018, at 23:48, Lennart Grahl <[e-mail]> wrote:
>>
>> I'm fine with the modes, I don't have a strong opinion on whether or not
>> an IETF document should include some form of "consent". But I do have a
>> problem with the suggestion to use getUserMedia. Can we maybe remove it?
> 
> As the draft shepherd, I’m trying to figure out how to draw this WGLC to a close all in the hopes that we can help each other get this RTCweb WG ship docked.
> 
> As far as dropping the getUserMedia suggestion, I’m a little hesitant to just drop it at this late date.  That suggestion has been in the draft since October 2016 and it’s stood the test of a couple of WG reviews; not last calls mind you but there’s been plenty of time for folks to say get that outta there.  And technically, it’s just a suggestion with no normative language.  So … maybe a happy middle ground is to have another suggestion so that there’s more than one potential mechanism?
> 
> spt
>