IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [rtcweb] Referring to 5245bis or 5245?

Martin Thomson <martin.thomson@gmail.com> Thu, 18 May 2017 15:00 UTC

Return-Path: <martin.thomson@gmail.com>
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 35A3112EBA9 for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 18 May 2017 08:00:06 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.699
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.699 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, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com
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 E9TqwAZL18hl for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 18 May 2017 08:00:04 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-wm0-x230.google.com (mail-wm0-x230.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:400c:c09::230]) (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 5E36D12E85E for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Thu, 18 May 2017 07:54:29 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-wm0-x230.google.com with SMTP id b84so204834700wmh.0 for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Thu, 18 May 2017 07:54:29 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc:content-transfer-encoding; bh=qM572Ct4b1/tmAczPYt1NcNFSi1lfNUx5TmbI6PxRdM=; b=n6TO8bKah6Ugn79DitK5rmhckf4dsyZ0c+tBtmuP/Bp7SxI8cLzRHnlRhjryc+jrYl WbU6k5bHvjL3d8PBZ3qUP7AsZfbQD+LtHjAkoCer2Hr8jICKNnmCZw/yhyfDAgTgJ8Cx Bniy+yyRKsKToeRqqxvpByKzEEqV8nSl76i2YHRahGd6s9tWXB0eh5kiwyMZ+G4BcjGO GFB+kaBMO8hmZPU9sewFqtueztroohR2u4obQzcwRoTBnVRcsN+1CWHVV+Ku09Nr65j7 ct23SJMIkPDeHW9SbcfooSPGk0WL4S1N7xID2kXUekIHSM0dP06uUH/yOe58/LO23+1Q 6nEQ==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc:content-transfer-encoding; bh=qM572Ct4b1/tmAczPYt1NcNFSi1lfNUx5TmbI6PxRdM=; b=lFjUD7F1R+ONqkC3uVqxAR4b7xE05C/Hn8OvBMhi74AF/aQRgdndTbln9/TnP46soC /xtzcqRDFof6Jhflk+dJUfSxwOwFjn7moCnzJ8osqhqiz3g5tqA9axganiYNDFTn22l/ mp0ccFRS0QFgKm6/YkAlmSi/0DdQgcofE6ZTj0yrM9LkdBSBKsevx0SjiPFpJp69LiQL 9VqJLuaSmT6J+cqwbyheVNOLbrN18Oz8YpbdTdMJDMgpgLIseUAt3UtZTc0RkY7BVm9p 7Tn5czYNIuiZhAkKB4H75PagM8LpN6/szw4CP9Ks5+1A3JFji4faI18dYYigLZMwZSI7 YOlQ==
X-Gm-Message-State: AODbwcBiWvXYLDbrKS8cvdMBLrlshY+i9Qc6mRz7R+Lp+cXxdQTlmTLe YcRt25CxG1OcZA2MMdri7aF/NFaeT71HTMY=
X-Received: by 10.25.148.20 with SMTP id w20mr1043429lfd.169.1495119267884; Thu, 18 May 2017 07:54:27 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.46.75.9 with HTTP; Thu, 18 May 2017 07:54:27 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <4C1F0FE7-F7E6-47F7-922D-057E4E7FA466@sn3rd.com>
References: <4C1F0FE7-F7E6-47F7-922D-057E4E7FA466@sn3rd.com>
From: Martin Thomson <martin.thomson@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 18 May 2017 10:54:27 -0400
Message-ID: <CABkgnnVhS07gUdw+MJT8dLH89=Y1HBhrrwh6wTGs5gyy8O5DWw@mail.gmail.com>
To: Sean Turner <sean@sn3rd.com>
Cc: RTCWeb IETF <rtcweb@ietf.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/rtcweb/SKevxfI3Z6u_UxjTj-2qNHe6cXM>
Subject: Re: [rtcweb] Referring to 5245bis or 5245?
X-BeenThere: rtcweb@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
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: Thu, 18 May 2017 15:00:06 -0000

I'm really confused about the statement regarding -transports.  You
say that 5245 is sufficient, then follow with justification for the
opposite position.

If we have as large a dependency as bundle that refers to 5245bis,
then we are taking a transitive dependency on 5245bis and might as
well refer to that.

A lot of this comes down to what bundle says.  Now, I see that bundle
depends on both 5245 and its -bis, which seems pretty inconsistent.  I
don't immediately see any strong reason for bundle to refer to the
-bis, though it does refer to the ice-sip-sdp draft, which might be
sufficiently implicated as to make the change necessary.  We should
ask Christer to confirm this.

I think that if we clarify that either way, then the reference in
-dualstack-fairness seems less of a concern; that document doesn't
need to reference 5245bis, though it would be nice if it could.

On 18 May 2017 at 10:12, Sean Turner <sean@sn3rd.com> wrote:
> ekr’s discuss on draft-ietf-rtcweb-overview has raised whether drafts should refer to RFC 5245 or draft-ietf-ice-rfc5245bis.  We only need to normatively refer to 5245bis if a technical part of 5245bis needs to be read and implemented in order to implement the referring draft.  We have 7 drafts that refer to RFC 5245 and 2  that refer to draft-ietf-rfc5245bis:
>
> draft-ietf-rtcweb-overview: As noted in my response to ekr’s discuss position [0], the chairs believe that the reference to “ICE” in the ICE Agent definition should be to RFC 5245.
>
> draft-ietf-rtcweb-transports: Likewise, the chairs believer that a reference to RFC 5245 is also appropriate in transports.  This draft was changed in version -17 to refer to 5245bis.  From GH: "The drafts -bundle and -dualstack-fairness both depend on 5245bis according to Cullen's chart in 'rtcweb-deps-13', and we already have a normative dependency from -transport on these.  So consistency of the bundle is improved by referencing 5245bis."
>
> spt
>
> [0] https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/rtcweb/GWdXRIO68FZwVtzzqugnELKeaY8
> _______________________________________________
> rtcweb mailing list
> rtcweb@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rtcweb

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email