Re: [rtcweb] Resolving whether to support additional key management methods

On Fri, Oct 5, 2012 at 10:11 AM, Harald Alvestrand <harald@alvestrand.no> wrote:
> On 10/04/2012 05:32 PM, Ted Hardie wrote:

> What is the proposed outcome space of this discussion?
> We already have a decision of "MUST do DTLS(-SRTP)",

Yes, and we are not proposing to re-discuss whether this a MUST; we
want to focus on whether there are additional proposals which have
consensus.

> but I'm not sure what
> the other questions are.
>
> I could see the result of the SDES discussion being one of:
>
> - MUST do SDES
> - SHOULD do SDES
> - MAY do SDES
> - MUST NOT do SDES
>
> I also see another discussion around EKT, which could conclude
>
> - MUST do EKT
> - MAY do EKT
> - MUST NOT do EKT
>
> (I don't see much point in "SHOULD do EKT" - it doesn't give
> interoperability, so is not much more useful than MAY)
>
> Are there other things on the table? Are both of the above on the table?
>

Both of the above discussions have already started, and they have not
concluded; we want to conclude them.  If there are other proposals,
they can be brought forward in the context of this discussion,
provided they do not start with "let's ditch DTLS-(SRTP)".

regards,

Ted

>>
>> regards,
>>
>> Ted, Cullen, Magnus
>> _______________________________________________
>> rtcweb mailing list
>> rtcweb@ietf.org
>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rtcweb
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> rtcweb mailing list
> rtcweb@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rtcweb