IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [rtcweb] Clarification in draft-ietf-rtcweb-transports-11

Martin Thomson <martin.thomson@gmail.com> Fri, 05 February 2016 06:28 UTC

Return-Path: <martin.thomson@gmail.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 A9F261B366B for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 4 Feb 2016 22:28:12 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.999
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.999 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] 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 25Y1hinIJVSH for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 4 Feb 2016 22:28:11 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-io0-x22e.google.com (mail-io0-x22e.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4001:c06::22e]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id BF0A11B366A for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Thu, 4 Feb 2016 22:28:10 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-io0-x22e.google.com with SMTP id f81so118664071iof.0 for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Thu, 04 Feb 2016 22:28:10 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type; bh=qKDE5yMn3EDGBj5W+O9ZVb47qEAIO+WJ4KpUBRSrIIw=; b=retByaXL0peGQDyJ+NDHeSXpAza0zMqGcEfx/fFPRKea9Bb6VT6vAknF+YByod1akx y6tlybT+6nuAoAqjKLTdNwoibNwymYcTfkzI/FIDedXROQC4X4cE0MYZGKAPJdMttGQq +JdnmYUYKaqjdQDrpCZtN6oelQF3aJF1/X9LrXxL5z+lU/Fc3zrMg+SjzH3NXbHsfvja 94TxnNX6ZmGcxYlyCdh+XBqD0MlZlsskWi7CCk0jBCjUlwkLgtxlEfQegmJguYxruscd TK8vbQd8MHV1f5n0X38z4TPo6PKWCKzKkLCdPp4YiUc+xyF4qMGJGbQoNPJBkYFfYSXo WJ5A==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date :message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type; bh=qKDE5yMn3EDGBj5W+O9ZVb47qEAIO+WJ4KpUBRSrIIw=; b=C2conBpbjzV2dSPUANMC2sDFTKuuwK0sKm9DxjIG0+rMrcNHpMfvwuufBkbsiyB64S 7N6cBqCnUNzoAbwzh2xEr78pTLYRd9cdA3P1f1iAp9z5YTOY/8RFV/h1vl2hc+n5PhtP E/QMTfmfQibu4UxrfC4Rw7LoFgGTUQbcYTSSIqzHL56ONi/GoifkLPjDmOHg1nX7hJGj IFJ3pIffaMhun2CIfPGxP4aqe0Fy8Q4ZFL6a1ELQxBVC5siQhpK4bAJza92qoS2lDEjD PlL5VcYsZY8g9rB6aY7l0yy79yYsLhJdU1yIWvmDlR9+iV10SahscSjDNdVPz1Gz6nHh nHGg==
X-Gm-Message-State: AG10YOSMgLbfnPTFDure4E54zVc3sRK0Wvy75pq3t37yyDKgtfYgBnTXUEzSRVupibciHL3wM66xkayVeMYzNQ==
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.107.16.153 with SMTP id 25mr13809462ioq.100.1454653690224; Thu, 04 Feb 2016 22:28:10 -0800 (PST)
Received: by 10.36.53.79 with HTTP; Thu, 4 Feb 2016 22:28:10 -0800 (PST)
Received: by 10.36.53.79 with HTTP; Thu, 4 Feb 2016 22:28:10 -0800 (PST)
In-Reply-To: <CABcZeBOjYyQP10sSK91EvaCnW0c-ei+UJqk5KOkTG4CEjE=gzQ@mail.gmail.com>
References: <F63DF3E8-51BF-4142-923A-663D053483C8@iii.ca> <CABcZeBOjYyQP10sSK91EvaCnW0c-ei+UJqk5KOkTG4CEjE=gzQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 05 Feb 2016 17:28:10 +1100
Message-ID: <CABkgnnXchQTa4VEawdPeKbwP0QStcxGifhL-vboxhPTKEEFfuQ@mail.gmail.com>
From: Martin Thomson <martin.thomson@gmail.com>
To: EKR <ekr@rtfm.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="001a113edb167a587b052afff467"
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/rtcweb/Qk9OoZCIg757mcvObOmu7sEG8es>
Cc: Harald Alvestrand <hta@google.com>, "<rtcweb@ietf.org>" <rtcweb@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [rtcweb] Clarification in draft-ietf-rtcweb-transports-11
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: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/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: Fri, 05 Feb 2016 06:28:12 -0000

I think that Cullen's request is reasonable.

I really don't understand the obsession with labeling.  Branding something
as less than 100% "compliant" if they don't use the header field seems OK
to me.  There are plenty of other places where implementations will be
non-compliant. Also, I think that everyone involved understands that the
target is still moving.
On Feb 5, 2016 2:59 AM, "Eric Rescorla" <ekr@rtfm.com> wrote:

>
>
> On Wed, Feb 3, 2016 at 7:16 AM, Cullen Jennings <fluffy@iii.ca> wrote:
>
>> I think we need to make the ALPN a bit more explicit. We agreed to
>> include the ALPN header so that a proxy knows it might receive video packet
>> rates tunnelled across it. However the text on this is not 100% clear.
>> Right now it says
>>
>>    If it does so, it MUST support the "ALPN" header as
>>    specified in [RFC7639],
>>
>> But some people have posted out including this header is optional in 7639
>> so there might be some ubiquity here about what is meant. I think we should
>> change the word “support” to “include” to make it clear this needs to be
>> sent to the proxy so that it would read
>>
>>     If it does so, it MUST include the "ALPN" header as
>>    specified in [RFC7639],
>>
>> I believe that correctly reflects what we intended on this. There is no
>> requirement for the proxy to understand or do anything with this header.
>> Old proxies will just ignore it and cary on as if it was not there.
>>
>
> I wouldn't have a problem with this if it were restricted to browsers.
> However,
> we don't want to careful about retroactively branding endpoints which
> aren't
> browsers but can talk to WebRTC clients as noncompliant. Maybe this
> is like codecs where they are "WebRTC Compatible"?
>
> -Ekr
>
> Cullen
>>
>> (with my individual contributor hat on)
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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
>
>

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email