Re: [rtcweb] DRAFT Agenda for RTCWEB

worley@ariadne.com (Dale R. Worley) Fri, 01 March 2013 19:58 UTC

Return-Path: <worley@shell01.TheWorld.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 063B621F8B77 for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 1 Mar 2013 11:58:03 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.764
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.764 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.216, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1, RCVD_IN_SORBS_WEB=0.619]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id VvyhLTd1MTIn for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 1 Mar 2013 11:58:02 -0800 (PST)
Received: from TheWorld.com (pcls6.std.com [192.74.137.146]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 60CD721F8B75 for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Fri, 1 Mar 2013 11:58:02 -0800 (PST)
Received: from shell.TheWorld.com (svani@shell01.theworld.com [192.74.137.71]) by TheWorld.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id r21JvL8x029606; Fri, 1 Mar 2013 14:57:24 -0500
Received: from shell01.TheWorld.com (localhost.theworld.com [127.0.0.1]) by shell.TheWorld.com (8.13.6/8.12.8) with ESMTP id r21JvLFM2850768; Fri, 1 Mar 2013 14:57:21 -0500 (EST)
Received: (from worley@localhost) by shell01.TheWorld.com (8.13.6/8.13.6/Submit) id r21JvLZG2849736; Fri, 1 Mar 2013 14:57:21 -0500 (EST)
Date: Fri, 1 Mar 2013 14:57:21 -0500 (EST)
Message-Id: <201303011957.r21JvLZG2849736@shell01.TheWorld.com>
From: worley@ariadne.com (Dale R. Worley)
Sender: worley@ariadne.com (Dale R. Worley)
To: Michael Tuexen <Michael.Tuexen@lurchi.franken.de>
In-reply-to: <5EB4AF68-2BB3-4243-B759-249065D8815F@lurchi.franken.de> (Michael.Tuexen@lurchi.franken.de)
References: <CA+9kkMALouyyzN4dcGdF92TO2HGcBHbHR6fvHg7QC-x5ndCGjw@mail.gmail.com> <7594FB04B1934943A5C02806D1A2204B10B717@ESESSMB209.ericsson.se> <03FBA798AC24E3498B74F47FD082A92F36EA7EAB@US70UWXCHMBA04.zam.alcatel-lucent.com> <201303011558.r21FwfGb2830347@shell01.TheWorld.com> <5EB4AF68-2BB3-4243-B759-249065D8815F@lurchi.franken.de>
Cc: rtcweb@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [rtcweb] DRAFT Agenda for RTCWEB
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: Fri, 01 Mar 2013 19:58:03 -0000

> From: Michael Tuexen <Michael.Tuexen@lurchi.franken.de>

> As far as I understand it is easy (based on the first byte) to demux
> DTLS from STUN and SRTP. SCTP is the only payload for DTLS, so there
> is no need for demuxing. So no need to control SCTP ports. Or am I
> missing something?

Controlling port numbers is needed if SCTP is *not* encapsulated in
DTLS and yet has to be distinguished from RTP et al.  (That would
become significant if encryption was applied to the bundle's packet
stream as a whole, rather than to the constituent streams
individually.)

Dale