Re: [rtcweb] SRTP not mandatory-to-use

Bernard Aboba <bernard_aboba@hotmail.com> Wed, 04 January 2012 00:57 UTC

Return-Path: <bernard_aboba@hotmail.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 3F59121F85B0 for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 3 Jan 2012 16:57:21 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -102.116
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.116 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.482, BAYES_00=-2.599, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
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 NsYNSh6tudw0 for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 3 Jan 2012 16:57:20 -0800 (PST)
Received: from blu0-omc3-s25.blu0.hotmail.com (blu0-omc3-s25.blu0.hotmail.com [65.55.116.100]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id AB97D21F85A9 for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Tue, 3 Jan 2012 16:57:20 -0800 (PST)
Received: from BLU152-W53 ([65.55.116.72]) by blu0-omc3-s25.blu0.hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.4675); Tue, 3 Jan 2012 16:57:20 -0800
Message-ID: <BLU152-W531CFF8BE3216F86B697F793970@phx.gbl>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_089d6939-677b-40b3-8945-fd88eceeed90_"
X-Originating-IP: [24.17.217.162]
From: Bernard Aboba <bernard_aboba@hotmail.com>
To: markus.isomaki@nokia.com, randell-ietf@jesup.org, rtcweb@ietf.org
Date: Tue, 03 Jan 2012 16:57:19 -0800
Importance: Normal
In-Reply-To: <E44893DD4E290745BB608EB23FDDB762141EF8@008-AM1MPN1-042.mgdnok.nokia.com>
References: <CAErhfrwu322=HTS0JZhum9EGfb73KmYS6CU_KMESyzEWhtvg2w@mail.gmail.com>, <CABcZeBOeg-O+6===5tk0haxC8nLxUQyEUFRES2FAoFEf00fKng@mail.gmail.com>, <CAErhfrxTKdo7Z+61x5ZcDt5ZM7C7ob5LNxMzwng_kk3Uqrp2_Q@mail.gmail.com>, <4F01A790.4060704@alvestrand.no> <4F02A061.60905@jesup.org>, <E44893DD4E290745BB608EB23FDDB762141EF8@008-AM1MPN1-042.mgdnok.nokia.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 04 Jan 2012 00:57:20.0243 (UTC) FILETIME=[CFC42C30:01CCCA7B]
Subject: Re: [rtcweb] SRTP not mandatory-to-use
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: Wed, 04 Jan 2012 00:57:21 -0000

Markus Isomaki said: 

> Looking at the specs of any recent smartphones with Wi-Fi and/or 3G connectivity, even the low-end ones seem to have at least 600 MHz ARM. Anything that I could imagine running WebRTC, in terms of real products, will have an even faster CPU. 

[BA] I agree that computational load is a non-issue.  I've deployed very inexpensive devices (e.g. ATAs costing less than $100) that support SRTP (albeit only with simple keying mechanisms like SDES).   

In practice, it's not SRTP computational load, but interop particularly in keying mechanisms where the issue is.  I've had to advise customers to turn SRTP off on devices that claim to support it, due to interop issues (e.g. SDES).  

There is some support out there for ZRTP, but few DTLS/SRTP implementations.