Re: [rtcweb] RFC 6520 vs. draft-ietf-rtcweb-stun-consent-freshness-00
Christer Holmberg <christer.holmberg@ericsson.com> Wed, 27 November 2013 07:38 UTC
Return-Path: <christer.holmberg@ericsson.com>
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 B62C51AE23A for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 26 Nov 2013 23:38:56 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.24
X-Spam-Level:
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 mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id VLJ_ON_mnPRp for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 26 Nov 2013 23:38:55 -0800 (PST)
Received: from sessmg20.mgmt.ericsson.se (sessmg20.ericsson.net [193.180.251.50]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id AA1BD1AE22C for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Tue, 26 Nov 2013 23:38:54 -0800 (PST)
X-AuditID: c1b4fb32-b7f388e0000057e0-54-5295a18dc4d1
Received: from ESESSHC001.ericsson.se (Unknown_Domain [153.88.253.125]) by sessmg20.mgmt.ericsson.se (Symantec Mail Security) with SMTP id 41.34.22496.D81A5925; Wed, 27 Nov 2013 08:38:53 +0100 (CET)
Received: from ESESSMB209.ericsson.se ([169.254.9.73]) by ESESSHC001.ericsson.se ([153.88.183.21]) with mapi id 14.02.0328.009; Wed, 27 Nov 2013 08:38:52 +0100
From: Christer Holmberg <christer.holmberg@ericsson.com>
To: Martin Thomson <martin.thomson@gmail.com>, "Tirumaleswar Reddy (tireddy)" <tireddy@cisco.com>
Thread-Topic: [rtcweb] RFC 6520 vs. draft-ietf-rtcweb-stun-consent-freshness-00
Thread-Index: AQHO6tMo2ZLY49xAXES3ooOpoMHDbpo4sR6g
Date: Wed, 27 Nov 2013 07:38:51 +0000
Message-ID: <7594FB04B1934943A5C02806D1A2204B1C55D40B@ESESSMB209.ericsson.se>
References: <CEAB0083.6FBE3%rmohanr@cisco.com> <5285E318.3090006@ericsson.com> <BLU169-W10885AF717BCBB60830502093E60@phx.gbl> <CABkgnnVpikDFwzfc=6CnHDOb6rmoe5-54AdYPyrbRvU34Epfig@mail.gmail.com> <BLU169-W11416B2C0D42888C078A7F493E60@phx.gbl> <913383AAA69FF945B8F946018B75898A2426E369@xmb-rcd-x10.cisco.com> <CABkgnnU5RqbF-PPtihGU+rtuqemN9f7N7nXLB05_OpF7EmhxjQ@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CABkgnnU5RqbF-PPtihGU+rtuqemN9f7N7nXLB05_OpF7EmhxjQ@mail.gmail.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-originating-ip: [153.88.183.20]
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Brightmail-Tracker: H4sIAAAAAAAAA+NgFvrCLMWRmVeSWpSXmKPExsUyM+JvrW7vwqlBBscWSFmsePKIxeLamX+M Fmv/tbNbnNi9jdGBxWPK742sHjtn3WX3WLLkJ5PHl8uf2QJYorhsUlJzMstSi/TtErgyzrdM ZC44w1ixYtZ7tgbGmYxdjJwcEgImEpPuH2aCsMUkLtxbz9bFyMUhJHCCUeLkuzZWCGcxo8S2 1UeBMhwcbAIWEt3/tEEaRASSJTY+n8QMUsMssIBR4vTqlSwgCWGBAInehe9YIIoCJVofLmSH sI0kWpfcZgWxWQRUJZ7MvA8W5xXwlVjccQVqczOzxMK578ESnEDNR1c1gg1iBDrv+6k1YKcy C4hL3HoyH+psAYkle84zQ9iiEi8f/2OFsBUlrk5fDlWvI7Fg9yc2CFtbYtnC18wQiwUlTs58 wjKBUWwWkrGzkLTMQtIyC0nLAkaWVYySxanFxbnpRgZ6uem5JXqpRZnJxcX5eXrFqZsYgTF3 cMtvox2MJ/fYH2KU5mBREue9zloTJCSQnliSmp2aWpBaFF9UmpNafIiRiYNTqoGxN0JvPQeH WXTx+2OJr8x3Jm2Vu/5dYUWUTknhqcf/Cp6y7GCqZHj7ZdGpjZsy1A68ttHfbjrt6OsDU9bb hXVUuHgfWl3i/2qu62qXV75G287NYFgz6ccH9UNnjE/8D0hborwqMOr8Jae1q/+sP+Tk+Ekn KGGK8N2ElQKMrAEHJs/xCGZTCn6yQomlOCPRUIu5qDgRAHQV19iHAgAA
Cc: "draft-ietf-rtcweb-stun-consent-freshness@tools.ietf.org" <draft-ietf-rtcweb-stun-consent-freshness@tools.ietf.org>, "rtcweb@ietf.org" <rtcweb@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [rtcweb] RFC 6520 vs. draft-ietf-rtcweb-stun-consent-freshness-00
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: Wed, 27 Nov 2013 07:38:57 -0000
Hi, > [1] and [2] can be solved by mandating WebRTC endpoints to support consent. I thought we were going to do that anyway - no matter what consent mechanism we use. Regards, Christer
- [rtcweb] Comments on draft-ietf-rtcweb-stun-conse… Magnus Westerlund
- Re: [rtcweb] Comments on draft-ietf-rtcweb-stun-c… Ram Mohan R (rmohanr)
- Re: [rtcweb] Comments on draft-ietf-rtcweb-stun-c… Magnus Westerlund
- Re: [rtcweb] RFC 6520 vs. draft-ietf-rtcweb-stun-… Bernard Aboba
- Re: [rtcweb] RFC 6520 vs. draft-ietf-rtcweb-stun-… Martin Thomson
- Re: [rtcweb] RFC 6520 vs. draft-ietf-rtcweb-stun-… Bernard Aboba
- Re: [rtcweb] RFC 6520 vs. draft-ietf-rtcweb-stun-… Tirumaleswar Reddy (tireddy)
- Re: [rtcweb] RFC 6520 vs. draft-ietf-rtcweb-stun-… Michael Tuexen
- Re: [rtcweb] RFC 6520 vs. draft-ietf-rtcweb-stun-… Martin Thomson
- Re: [rtcweb] RFC 6520 vs. draft-ietf-rtcweb-stun-… Muthu Arul Mozhi Perumal (mperumal)
- Re: [rtcweb] RFC 6520 vs. draft-ietf-rtcweb-stun-… Christer Holmberg
- Re: [rtcweb] RFC 6520 vs. draft-ietf-rtcweb-stun-… Tirumaleswar Reddy (tireddy)
- Re: [rtcweb] RFC 6520 vs. draft-ietf-rtcweb-stun-… Christer Holmberg
- Re: [rtcweb] RFC 6520 vs. draft-ietf-rtcweb-stun-… Tirumaleswar Reddy (tireddy)
- Re: [rtcweb] RFC 6520 vs. draft-ietf-rtcweb-stun-… Martin Thomson
- Re: [rtcweb] RFC 6520 vs. draft-ietf-rtcweb-stun-… Muthu Arul Mozhi Perumal (mperumal)
- Re: [rtcweb] RFC 6520 vs. draft-ietf-rtcweb-stun-… Martin Thomson
- Re: [rtcweb] RFC 6520 vs. draft-ietf-rtcweb-stun-… Muthu Arul Mozhi Perumal (mperumal)
- Re: [rtcweb] RFC 6520 vs. draft-ietf-rtcweb-stun-… Roman Shpount
- Re: [rtcweb] Comments on draft-ietf-rtcweb-stun-c… Ram Mohan R (rmohanr)
- Re: [rtcweb] Comments on draft-ietf-rtcweb-stun-c… Magnus Westerlund