IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [rtcweb] RTCWeb Forking usecase [was RE: draft-kaplan-rtcweb-sip-interworking-requirements-00]

Iñaki Baz Castillo <ibc@aliax.net> Sat, 29 October 2011 16:14 UTC

Return-Path: <ibc@aliax.net>
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 C67BC21F84D9 for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 29 Oct 2011 09:14:26 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.645
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.645 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.032, BAYES_00=-2.599, FM_FORGED_GMAIL=0.622, MIME_8BIT_HEADER=0.3, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1]
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 obaW7sl+T0AJ for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 29 Oct 2011 09:14:26 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-vx0-f172.google.com (mail-vx0-f172.google.com [209.85.220.172]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3601A21F84CD for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Sat, 29 Oct 2011 09:14:26 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by vcbfo1 with SMTP id fo1so4852152vcb.31 for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Sat, 29 Oct 2011 09:14:25 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.220.147.198 with SMTP id m6mr1233705vcv.128.1319904865675; Sat, 29 Oct 2011 09:14:25 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.220.184.6 with HTTP; Sat, 29 Oct 2011 09:14:25 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <4EAC24A2.70401@alvestrand.no>
References: <20111024224257.28459.65554.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> <6EB8679A-13D5-4AD7-97F2-BC35FC0966F0@acmepacket.com> <2E239D6FCD033C4BAF15F386A979BF51159C32@sonusinmail02.sonusnet.com> <CALiegfnVaZjh1K+brd180Z9Ufheau3v6OJe6Ejv8P7wzw6ROQw@mail.gmail.com> <2E239D6FCD033C4BAF15F386A979BF51159D7A@sonusinmail02.sonusnet.com> <4EAAF413.8030501@alvestrand.no> <2E239D6FCD033C4BAF15F386A979BF51159D7B@sonusinmail02.sonusnet.com> <247FFE2C-DB2C-4280-A219-BE1503662F92@acmepacket.com> <4EAB2657.7090609@jesup.org> <CAD5OKxu=3FvnUDV5m1TW8n+7D+B6ihp_g7TXKtJVaVW3gtiySQ@mail.gmail.com> <4EAC24A2.70401@alvestrand.no>
Date: Sat, 29 Oct 2011 18:14:25 +0200
Message-ID: <CALiegfm5ayY_MDeAnNsCz0BqcCu3hBHO-Vz_z7HAiPnuVjRanA@mail.gmail.com>
From: Iñaki Baz Castillo <ibc@aliax.net>
To: Harald Alvestrand <harald@alvestrand.no>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Cc: rtcweb@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [rtcweb] RTCWeb Forking usecase [was RE: draft-kaplan-rtcweb-sip-interworking-requirements-00]
X-BeenThere: rtcweb@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
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: Sat, 29 Oct 2011 16:14:26 -0000

2011/10/29 Harald Alvestrand <harald@alvestrand.no>:
> Of course we could mandate DTLS-SRTP key negotiation.....

SIPit29 summary says:

> 80% of the endpoints present supported SRTP using sdes.
> There were no dtls-srtp implementations at this SIPit.

Just a comment. Of coure the current status of SRTP implementations in
SIP world should not be the only argument for WebRTC.


-- 
Iñaki Baz Castillo
<ibc@aliax.net>

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email