Re: [rtcweb] OPS-Dir review of draft-ietf-rtcweb-stun-consent-freshness-13

"Ram Mohan R (rmohanr)" <> Fri, 29 May 2015 03:50 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost ( []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id DA0891A8A1C; Thu, 28 May 2015 20:50:54 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -14.511
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-14.511 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01, USER_IN_DEF_DKIM_WL=-7.5] autolearn=ham
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 1SSUJm2iFFKP; Thu, 28 May 2015 20:50:53 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( []) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-SEED-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 8277B1A8A0E; Thu, 28 May 2015 20:50:53 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple;;; l=1612; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1432871453; x=1434081053; h=from:to:subject:date:message-id:references:in-reply-to: content-id:content-transfer-encoding:mime-version; bh=IsXcVr3qqRVc7LZm7idyPEJ4WjhNKWoaZlTgElAufQo=; b=hszSjO8XVQ/+GjQ5O+/xYwAgMcgJYZ9yN1ueUqZma5f7hH9ScNtoI7eo 2MyhCDKXPd5vCJ5npy0kx64Eh4oFDCBq4vwsvrYcuciFXe8ZAol+EsQxZ nGwx8BCuloJLUHTEaDNDYDCKnBVp9lN+oYltkBwVD31sI+HhaR+loR6aT E=;
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.13,514,1427760000"; d="scan'208";a="154298840"
Received: from ([]) by with ESMTP; 29 May 2015 03:50:52 +0000
Received: from ( []) by (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id t4T3oqLc007491 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=FAIL); Fri, 29 May 2015 03:50:52 GMT
Received: from ([]) by ([]) with mapi id 14.03.0195.001; Thu, 28 May 2015 22:50:52 -0500
From: "Ram Mohan R (rmohanr)" <>
To: "Tirumaleswar Reddy (tireddy)" <>, "Black, David (" <>, "joel jaeggli (" <>, "" <>, "" <>
Thread-Topic: [rtcweb] OPS-Dir review of draft-ietf-rtcweb-stun-consent-freshness-13
Thread-Index: AQHQmcKoVnZDKnMNxUCZQpJSA9/Blw==
Date: Fri, 29 May 2015 03:50:51 +0000
Message-ID: <>
References: <>
In-Reply-To: <>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
user-agent: Microsoft-MacOutlook/
x-originating-ip: []
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-ID: <>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
Archived-At: <>
Subject: Re: [rtcweb] OPS-Dir review of draft-ietf-rtcweb-stun-consent-freshness-13
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: Real-Time Communication in WEB-browsers working group list <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 29 May 2015 03:50:55 -0000

See inline for one comment:

-----Original Message-----
From: "Tirumaleswar Reddy   (tireddy)" <>
Date: Thursday, 28 May 2015 12:02 pm
To: "Black, David (" <>, "joel
jaeggli (" <>, ""
<>, "" <>
Subject: Re: [rtcweb] OPS-Dir review
of	draft-ietf-rtcweb-stun-consent-freshness-13

>>Ok, but .. this is not about "how applications should handle" loss of
>>it's about "how implementations should report" loss of consent.  Part of
>>is already in Section 7, which indicates how the application learns that
>>consent has expired.  It would suffice to add a sentence added to that
>>section to indicate that there are other reasons for loss of ability to
>>data, and include an example of how at least one other is reported to
>The circuit breaker algorithm discussed in section 7.1 of
>[I-D.ietf-rtcweb-rtp-usage] could be one of the reasons for ceasing
>transmission of media and to notify the application about the loss of
>ability to transmit data.

There may be multiple reasons for a webRTC endpoint to cease transmission
(one being circuit breaker) and I feel we should not add all those here in
consent draft.

Also the the above statement indicates a need for a new API to notify the
application about the loss of ability and this is some thing outside the
scope of this document.

IMO this text looks out of place and we should not add this to draft.