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

Harald Alvestrand <harald@alvestrand.no> Thu, 10 April 2014 11:55 UTC

Return-Path: <harald@alvestrand.no>
X-Original-To: rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3C2711A022D for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 10 Apr 2014 04:55:31 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.172
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.172 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.272] autolearn=ham
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 3_Tr9qxujlVR for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 10 Apr 2014 04:55:26 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mork.alvestrand.no (mork.alvestrand.no [IPv6:2001:700:1:2::117]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7FB3A1A0212 for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Thu, 10 Apr 2014 04:55:26 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mork.alvestrand.no (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4D42F7C32B4 for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Thu, 10 Apr 2014 13:55:25 +0200 (CEST)
X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at alvestrand.no
Received: from mork.alvestrand.no ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (mork.alvestrand.no [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id djGJke2pQF-K for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Thu, 10 Apr 2014 13:55:24 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from hta-hippo.lul.corp.google.com (unknown [IPv6:2620:0:1043:1:7646:a0ff:fe90:e2bb]) by mork.alvestrand.no (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 466A47C064F for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Thu, 10 Apr 2014 13:55:24 +0200 (CEST)
Message-ID: <534686AA.9040304@alvestrand.no>
Date: Thu, 10 Apr 2014 13:55:22 +0200
From: Harald Alvestrand <harald@alvestrand.no>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.3.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: rtcweb@ietf.org
References: <20140409100258.9712.74771.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> <F09BCD44-1060-4DCB-A796-7A31F1C634DE@csperkins.org> <A05F0177-568C-4B19-AD48-9F415A4C008B@lurchi.franken.de> <02F2BCF4-70B5-47A4-ACE6-C0CCCAB11A50@csperkins.org> <9889BAD9-D9A7-42F2-A0DC-632C26696345@lurchi.franken.de> <73C21E05-E36C-4899-98A4-9D762B75FCE4@csperkins.org>
In-Reply-To: <73C21E05-E36C-4899-98A4-9D762B75FCE4@csperkins.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1252"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/rtcweb/N7Cxl9UBC25Ln96RQqnbZvYcjDg
Subject: Re: [rtcweb] I-D Action: draft-ietf-rtcweb-data-channel-08.txt
X-BeenThere: rtcweb@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
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: <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, 10 Apr 2014 11:55:31 -0000

On 04/09/2014 04:39 PM, Colin Perkins wrote:
> On 9 Apr 2014, at 15:33, Michael Tuexen <Michael.Tuexen@lurchi.franken.de> wrote:
>> On 09 Apr 2014, at 16:25, Colin Perkins <csp@csperkins.org> wrote:
>>> On 9 Apr 2014, at 15:20, Michael Tuexen <Michael.Tuexen@lurchi.franken.de> wrote:
>>>> On 09 Apr 2014, at 13:00, Colin Perkins <csp@csperkins.org> wrote:
>>>>> On 9 Apr 2014, at 11:02, Internet-Drafts@ietf.org 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.