Re: [rtcweb] Getting rid of SDP

Silvia Pfeiffer <silviapfeiffer1@gmail.com> Tue, 06 March 2018 07:02 UTC

Return-Path: <silviapfeiffer1@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 ED39A126CD6 for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 5 Mar 2018 23:02:16 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.45
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.45 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_ENVFROM_END_DIGIT=0.25, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_PASS=-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 iusDkc-kGqYq for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 5 Mar 2018 23:02:12 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-qk0-x22e.google.com (mail-qk0-x22e.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400d:c09::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 07D0C126CC4 for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Mon, 5 Mar 2018 23:02:12 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-qk0-x22e.google.com with SMTP id z197so23744508qkb.6 for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Mon, 05 Mar 2018 23:02:11 -0800 (PST)
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=B3lR8qjQi10N0vnvnvgyVW7pGjJOFVpV+ZdQPJe+cH4=; b=dLRDtjtpGDbF75QPQofpe6rLj2XYVYbeFCJsWDtgddXpIbEARLjxMhAmGc3Ud24/t9 6BA7zb1P/2bQBu+pvW7BqfopAPCZd26c8Jbd/XozTVFDKQumszGksS/BmTnpfmk7iQC9 fwBEJF6QBIGXqN4fhMmWGF7Dsx6OJSo7uYo/ikoukdqv/AM8opN7wuktutPRlXoM72YW LsNbOldDkzW1KpzDY0iPyFqrEMA2Ji7fhfqHPHTNAesExi4+m+tSJtNVt4CpbfEbjK8+ r5O4eJZb4VKq4ntWvTScBCISVNm2QIG2AFAIngNnB3oGh+0XezuuTAHC19visD2YGVN9 yvGA==
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=B3lR8qjQi10N0vnvnvgyVW7pGjJOFVpV+ZdQPJe+cH4=; b=dd0+OEETOn5FjxwMzpGxHszXdlYymP9FQsWaqu/b+tfkt7g/0WdZp0lcmTko0Hq/i0 CWXOj+/wh/4KQnN0T5F8wKv1KSFI9ZO58BmvOtTKeXAEj1M0kvfi2Fs68WyKuN+2G3Ml BuYn3VFPsr/T7slKvpEzoyuM3H0MEd19xEkFmL/k+ZtCTvyoyqE10dOb94vNDzHtMAcz /jj2vRYTb0CFfyUwc9riQORktW3MiKnlGF+N7ceBwj4je7YdP3k+qDlelcJTbBfO78MU 0DKKXAl94fW88jraskZjS2admPagbVV8aKlnRvhoBBVQYi2rf3nSJyAYCZu9TKrhTB9I TCFw==
X-Gm-Message-State: AElRT7GWQcFd+uz6vzW+6y2nsIqU7YydPMuStjxh2jsG99E7OUPG79yP i1DiI/xcny6s1rE4GxavLlpB7z+jCxQgt1qy/GDUiw==
X-Google-Smtp-Source: AG47ELsxVsNcGJMlPy+1UAYORopEEmMrdMuaM1GNDEImgc6S7lIwo6JzkOOyrE+jpZ+w7r+Fo3lZiVFI5WkFm3dNX2k=
X-Received: by 10.55.43.68 with SMTP id r65mr26274424qkh.117.1520319731088; Mon, 05 Mar 2018 23:02:11 -0800 (PST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.200.32.129 with HTTP; Mon, 5 Mar 2018 23:01:50 -0800 (PST)
In-Reply-To: <4de127a2-2936-0022-34af-614129ea105f@alvestrand.no>
References: <3B663EB9-52D3-4069-A31C-03D6D0BB38BB@iii.ca> <4de127a2-2936-0022-34af-614129ea105f@alvestrand.no>
From: Silvia Pfeiffer <silviapfeiffer1@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 06 Mar 2018 18:01:50 +1100
Message-ID: <CAHp8n2kuoVfGL7JVTh3Dw72rFMZn3xyAYM+xzaDvcDoFp3EL=g@mail.gmail.com>
To: Harald Alvestrand <harald@alvestrand.no>
Cc: rtcweb@ietf.org
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/rtcweb/T-nqZCMoq8P1VK6HmduDyC_YyJA>
Subject: Re: [rtcweb] Getting rid of SDP
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: Tue, 06 Mar 2018 07:02:17 -0000

Yes, please, let's make a list of the use cases and the problems.
Otherwise it feels like we're re-inventing technology for technology's
sake.

Kind Regards,
Silvia.

On Tue, Mar 6, 2018 at 5:39 PM, Harald Alvestrand <harald@alvestrand.no> wrote:
> Nice to see that you too are arguing that we should get rid of SDP's
> design errors!
>
> There are of course design errors (I think) in the proposal you made too
> (the most glaring one is that you tie sources to clients - in order to
> be generic building tools, sources need global IDs - otherwise we can't
> build distribution trees for Baumgartner's parachute jump from space
> using the same technology as chatting with Grandma). 128-bit random
> numbers are lovely global identifiers. (This is the same error that went
> into the original design of the http URL - tying location with identity.
> But I digress.)
>
> I'd also like to have a security story that hangs together - each layer
> has unique security properties that it needs to make sure are
> satisfiable - from the neeed to not make DDOS simple at the network
> layer to the assurance that I'm talking to Grandma and not some
> CGI-generated scammer-face at the application layer. We've so far failed
> to have a security story in WebRTC that is both comprehensive and
> attractive to deploy - I'd like to see us do better next time around.
>
> I'm a little bit hesitant to ask this, but .... should we go back and
> look at what use cases we plan to solve in this Grand Unified Scheme of
> Things?
>
> Harald
>
> On 03/05/2018 08:43 PM, Cullen Jennings wrote:
>> SDP is pretty awful. What we need to do to greatly simplify things is get rid of SDP. The offer answer is really complicated for modern systems that have more uniform capabilities so I would like to get rid of offer answer too. To simplify all the control, I think one needs to also simplify STUN, TURN, ICE, RTP, and SRTP.
>>
>> I wrote a draft outlining that - it is at:
>>
>> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-jennings-dispatch-new-media/
>>
>> it is being discussed on the dispatch@ietf.org email list ( you can join at https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dispatch). Glad to get PR at https://github.com/WhatIETF/draft-jennings-dispatch-new-media
>>
>> Love to get feedback in general and also on how this, or parts of it, would be a good way to go for the next version of WebRTC
>>
>> Thanks, Cullen
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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