IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [rtcweb] Network times . was SDP Security Descriptions (RFC 4568) and RTCWeb

Daniel-Constantin Mierla <miconda@gmail.com> Thu, 02 May 2013 09:42 UTC

Return-Path: <miconda@gmail.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 5235621F9957 for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 2 May 2013 02:42:51 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.598
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.598 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001]
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 PralVo2W7xtT for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 2 May 2013 02:42:49 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-ea0-x22d.google.com (mail-ea0-x22d.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4013:c01::22d]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A65B921F992E for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Thu, 2 May 2013 02:42:36 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-ea0-f173.google.com with SMTP id d10so168195eaj.18 for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Thu, 02 May 2013 02:42:35 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=x-received:message-id:date:from:reply-to:user-agent:mime-version:to :cc:subject:references:in-reply-to:content-type; bh=25+y/NOmkbwG7rKd3Nn4JBnUDRk2aa8NgLf3UdaKd3k=; b=TUBVSNTOeqHRnFdULtG7rK/xC+lMS+xCJRFxOCZTj0WSX8rKbEq1hp9+g+sbldo4Bu fFIhQ43RVRe3c05D2yK+KxVo2gXSS+G/QAfSkjfhdS8RpFiBzCmtF67oVDpQfWw6ZfKg f4KSsseJp5y+epaLeQDqvnhEQS9lH3AhnLl5q0S9weTiuu8Kh8OtQoK/FHtUbDsheFlN zXD1rOCQZqGtigpNt9RT7XngsbCbRTNgiyxMOrd8HduMX07l520BXZm2JmgZwryuKz2W 0l2TrWEaVZH9J0Cj2Qw9qLhyCCxj0gmymrfhy95r58t8vv24zDn78CaRjkX7Eql0gZ5x DMQQ==
X-Received: by 10.14.111.5 with SMTP id v5mr4714386eeg.27.1367487755719; Thu, 02 May 2013 02:42:35 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [127.0.0.1] (ns.asipto.com. [213.133.111.169]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPSA id bj12sm8509523eeb.8.2013.05.02.02.42.33 for <multiple recipients> (version=TLSv1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA bits=128/128); Thu, 02 May 2013 02:42:34 -0700 (PDT)
Message-ID: <51823508.8090305@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 02 May 2013 11:42:32 +0200
From: Daniel-Constantin Mierla <miconda@gmail.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.8; rv:21.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/21.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Karl Stahl <karl.stahl@intertex.se>, 'Justin Uberti' <juberti@google.com>
References: <3FA2E46D-C98E-4FC0-9F1D-AD595A861CE1@iii.ca> <AE1A6B5FD507DC4FB3C5166F3A05A48416281FDB@tk5ex14mbxc272.redmond.corp.microsoft.com> <03FBA798AC24E3498B74F47FD082A92F3BB8FAF7@US70UWXCHMBA04.zam.alcatel-lucent.com> <9F33F40F6F2CD847824537F3C4E37DDF0E6C04AF@MCHP04MSX.global-ad.net> <CAErhfrx6xi7rNmc6CZc5iyKiYv+oZbi3sBa5QywB7dUKtms2Aw@mail.gmail.com> <C643F355C8D33C48B983F1C1EA702A450B49EA@ESESSMB301.ericsson.se> <4AA3A95D6033ED488F8AE4E45F47448742B13620@WABOTH9MSGUSR8B.ITServices.sbc.com> <CALiegfmpZZigigQtaadsXup6VfWgJAF8--TJpbUwSJMmar7fRA@mail.gmail.com> <CAD5OKxv2d2DemnjHQdB8XU8NKfK-Uu913DLPq9JUT4z9kvFfTQ@mail.gmail.com> <829F9A35-5F23-4A0F-9831-80478F70965E@phonefromhere.com> <517E2F6A.30905@alvestrand.no> <C5E08FE080ACFD4DAE31E4BDBF944EB1134B0090@xmb-aln-x02.cisco.com> <5180f8ac.65f3440a.7deb.fffffeeaSMTPIN_ADDED_BROKEN@mx.google.com> <CAOJ7v-1K6B6GTBShbwcE2FZWtL+Hm_XLMS_cRvMJejx8gUtieg@mail.gmail.com> <51815b69.e3e8440a.460a.002eSMTPIN_ADDED_BROKEN@mx.google.com >
In-Reply-To: <51815b69.e3e8440a.460a.002eSMTPIN_ADDED_BROKEN@mx.google.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="------------040509050102010003090907"
Cc: "'Cullen Jennings (fluffy)'" <fluffy@cisco.com>, rtcweb@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [rtcweb] Network times . was SDP Security Descriptions (RFC 4568) and RTCWeb
X-BeenThere: rtcweb@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
Reply-To: miconda@gmail.com
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: Thu, 02 May 2013 09:42:51 -0000

On 5/1/13 8:13 PM, Karl Stahl wrote:
>
> RTT is round trip time, isn't it? Our 250 ms was just one way -- so 
> same finding.
>
Were these measurements involving rtp relays, or just point to point 
transmissions?

Considering the amount of symmetric nat firewalls, even with ICE, a 
relevant number of RTC sessions will require a public relay, TURN server 
or similar (unless everyone will be on IPv6 at the time of production 
WebRTC deployments, which seems to have a chance looking at some debates 
or issues/patents related to several WebRTC decisions :-) ).

As a new technology cannot satisfy everyone, but if it does not work 
good enough for majority, it will end up in a series of patches that 
will complicate everything (remember sip-nat relation). It is easier to 
digest and sell improvements brought by future extensions (e.g., 
alternative session setup mechanism for better security) than 
specifications doing actually downgrades.

Cheers,
Daniel

-- 
Daniel-Constantin Mierla - http://www.asipto.com
http://twitter.com/#!/miconda - http://www.linkedin.com/in/miconda
Kamailio Advanced Training, San Francisco, USA - June 24-27, 2013
   * http://asipto.com/u/katu *

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email