Re: [rtcweb] I-D Action: draft-ietf-rtcweb-data-channel-08.txt

Christer Holmberg <> Thu, 10 April 2014 11:57 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost ( []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id CB7691A067A for <>; Thu, 10 Apr 2014 04:57:56 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.24
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.24 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HELO_EQ_SE=0.35, HOST_MISMATCH_NET=0.311, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=no
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 2yNA-i7ks5ZQ for <>; Thu, 10 Apr 2014 04:57:53 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id B61DF1A0235 for <>; Thu, 10 Apr 2014 04:57:52 -0700 (PDT)
X-AuditID: c1b4fb31-b7f688e000003e64-1f-5346873e901d
Received: from (Unknown_Domain []) by (Symantec Mail Security) with SMTP id 50.FB.15972.E3786435; Thu, 10 Apr 2014 13:57:51 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from ([]) by ([]) with mapi id 14.03.0174.001; Thu, 10 Apr 2014 13:57:51 +0200
From: Christer Holmberg <>
To: Harald Alvestrand <>, "" <>
Thread-Topic: [rtcweb] I-D Action: draft-ietf-rtcweb-data-channel-08.txt
Date: Thu, 10 Apr 2014 11:57:49 +0000
Message-ID: <>
References: <> <> <> <> <> <> <>
In-Reply-To: <>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
x-originating-ip: []
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Brightmail-Tracker: H4sIAAAAAAAAA+NgFrrALMWRmVeSWpSXmKPExsUyM+Jvja59u1uwwfvzXBbH+rrYLNb+a2d3 YPK4MuEKq8eSJT+ZApiiuGxSUnMyy1KL9O0SuDKWXzrLXLBMpmLNmkb2BsbDYl2MnBwSAiYS HX8mMEHYYhIX7q1nA7GFBE4ySnR3JncxcgHZSxglPky9y9LFyMHBJmAh0f1PG6RGRCBYovf5 e0aQsLCAu0TPv1iIsIfEjE/LWSHsKImT97+BjWQRUJWYffkfO0g5r4CvxM+9BRDT/zFJ/Pm7 DKyGU0BX4s7zc2DnMAKd8/3UGjCbWUBc4taT+VBnCkgs2XOeGcIWlXj5+B8rhK0o0f60gRGi Xkdiwe5PbBC2tsSyha/B6nkFBCVOznzCMoFRdBaSsbOQtMxC0jILScsCRpZVjJLFqcVJuelG hnq56bkleqlFmcnFxfl5esWpmxiBsXJwy2/DHYwTr9kfYpTmYFES52WY3hkkJJCeWJKanZpa kFoUX1Sak1p8iJGJg1OqgXFJzFWp0Ifz2Z0dzty+fWVCi3alcOXph1Vu9q7RN5a/jo1e9tJT 9MY3tyxh8Q0e0tOePinLvOydlp0p/i047HbtFm/Pv92ZBxIYJKY9EWrJLFz3pVgyt/Emh+HM 36Lbn7r9iTExCTY6JsX8zTLNK5vlqHbRtbVLZ/ctSNyztvN92f4z26+KliqxFGckGmoxFxUn AgCOdsMRYwIAAA==
Subject: Re: [rtcweb] I-D Action: draft-ietf-rtcweb-data-channel-08.txt
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: Real-Time Communication in WEB-browsers working group list <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 10 Apr 2014 11:57:57 -0000


In BUNDLE we use "RTP-based media" terminology, eventhough BUNDLE will be used in WebRTC environments where SRTP is mandated.

Why can't we use the same here?



-----Original Message-----
From: rtcweb [] On Behalf Of Harald Alvestrand
Sent: 10. huhtikuuta 2014 14:55
Subject: Re: [rtcweb] I-D Action: draft-ietf-rtcweb-data-channel-08.txt

On 04/09/2014 04:39 PM, Colin Perkins wrote:
> On 9 Apr 2014, at 15:33, Michael Tuexen <> wrote:
>> On 09 Apr 2014, at 16:25, Colin Perkins <> wrote:
>>> On 9 Apr 2014, at 15:20, Michael Tuexen <> wrote:
>>>> On 09 Apr 2014, at 13:00, Colin Perkins <> wrote:
>>>>> On 9 Apr 2014, at 11:02, wrote:
>>>>>> A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts directories.
>>>>>> This draft is a work item of the Real-Time Communication in WEB-browsers Working Group of the IETF.
>>>>>>     Title           : WebRTC Data Channels
>>>>>>     Authors         : Randell Jesup
>>>>>>                       Salvatore Loreto
>>>>>>                       Michael Tuexen
>>>>>> 	Filename        : draft-ietf-rtcweb-data-channel-08.txt
>>>>>> 	Pages           : 15
>>>>>> 	Date            : 2014-04-09
>>>>>> Abstract:
>>>>>> The Real-Time Communication in WEB-browsers working group is 
>>>>>> charged to provide protocol support for direct interactive rich 
>>>>>> communication using audio, video, and data between two peers' 
>>>>>> web-browsers.  This document specifies the non-(S)RTP media data 
>>>>>> transport aspects of the WebRTC framework.  It provides an 
>>>>>> architectural overview of how the Stream Control Transmission 
>>>>>> Protocol (SCTP) is used in the WebRTC context as a generic 
>>>>>> transport service allowing WEB-browsers to exchange generic data from peer to peer.
>>>>> This talks about "(S)RTP" throughout, but the rtp-usage draft requires that SRTP be used for WebRTC, and disallows plain RTP. I think this draft could be simplified by changing "(S)RTP" to "SRTP" throughout.
>>>> Hi Colin,
>>>> The (S)RTP notion goes back to a comment from Magnus. If I remember it correctly he considers SRTP a profile of RTP. Since I don't wanted to just use RTP, I ended up with (S)RTP based on a discussion with Magnus.
>>>> However, I'm fine with changing it to SRTP...
>>> SRTP is an RTP profile. My comment was that if this is for WebRTC only, then  only SRTP can be used, and not plain RTP. Using "(S)RTP" rather than "SRTP" in this draft suggests that the secure profile is optional, which isn't the case in WebRTC. If this is for more general use than WebRTC, then "(S)RTP" is fine.
>> It is clear that in WebRTC only SRTP is used...
> I don't believe your draft is clear on that, due to the use of "(S)RTP" terminology. That's why I commented.
Enforcing the SRTP-only rule for WebRTC is not the business of this draft, so it's not a normative statement in any way, shape or form.

If it's possible to use these channels outside of WebRTC, and some of these places claim to be able to use pure RTP with appropriate security, then making use of "SRTP" only in this draft is confusing.

I see arguments both ways, and want to leave it at editors' discretion.

rtcweb mailing list