Re: [rtcweb] Requiring ICE for RTC calls

"Olle E. Johansson" <oej@edvina.net> Tue, 27 September 2011 20:07 UTC

Return-Path: <oej@edvina.net>
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 69DAA21F8FB8 for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 27 Sep 2011 13:07:26 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.237
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.237 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.011, BAYES_00=-2.599, HELO_EQ_SE=0.35, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001]
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 xF35+vZ1gHG1 for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 27 Sep 2011 13:07:25 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from smtp7.webway.se (smtp7.webway.se [212.3.14.205]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0D72121F8F9B for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Tue, 27 Sep 2011 13:07:23 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [192.168.40.24] (ns.webway.se [87.96.134.125]) by smtp7.webway.se (Postfix) with ESMTPA id EAD7B754BCE4; Tue, 27 Sep 2011 20:10:07 +0000 (UTC)
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1244.3)
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="Apple-Mail=_77799375-F79F-408D-B372-32C96E7806DC"
From: "Olle E. Johansson" <oej@edvina.net>
In-Reply-To: <2E239D6FCD033C4BAF15F386A979BF510F1120@sonusinmail02.sonusnet.com>
Date: Tue, 27 Sep 2011 22:10:28 +0200
Message-Id: <DB28A150-F109-4109-A8B6-9FC9ED159441@edvina.net>
References: <CAD5OKxtNjmWBz92bRuxka7e-BUpTPgVUvr3ahJGpmZ-U5nuPbQ@mail.gmail.com><CAD6AjGSmz5T_F+SK2EoBQm6T-iRKp7dd4j8ZAF5JKdbbyomZQA@mail.gmail.com><CALiegfmO54HC+g9L_DYn4jtXAAbLEvS++qxKa6TNrLDREs9SeA@mail.gmail.com><4E80984A.903@skype.net><CALiegfmyvTb57WVooKryS-ubfcg+w5gZ+zfO1zzBLn3609AzaA@mail.gmail.com><4E809EE6.2050702@skype.net><2E239D6FCD033C4BAF15F386A979BF510F1087@sonusinmail02.sonusnet.com><BLU152-W62B7F2AC3F0D5B6E277CB993F00@phx.gbl><CAD5OKxt=P3jg9N0weFUZLvUYQxyeXa+9YMtpc8wn7osuPQmTpg@mail.gmail.com><CAD5OKxtVCgiFV_iAYd1w0uZZcS5+gsixOHJ0jGN=0CMdq++kdg@mail.gmail.com><CAOJ7v-3PrnNyesL+x-mto9Q9djjiJ13QZHXCiGfY1mv3nubrqQ@mail.gmail.com><CAD5OKxsKTHCuBQdUnGQtGfF7NmZZExLe9Q9B9cNR=483neuHPQ@mail.gmail.com><CAOJ7v-1rzdmviAnGknVZmrU_TDNoC3NmWd1g6iyx0WzZ4xB3Pw@mail.gmail.com><4E820825.9090101@skype.net> <CAD5OKxvmKi3Py0gNcTdREdfS07hA-=f6L+u8KKVgSWztMft9kQ@mail.gmail.com> <2E239D6FCD033C4BAF15F386A979BF510F1120@sonusinmail02.sonusnet.com>
To: "Ravindran Parthasarathi" <pravindran@sonusnet.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1244.3)
Cc: rtcweb@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [rtcweb] Requiring ICE for RTC calls
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: Tue, 27 Sep 2011 20:07:26 -0000

27 sep 2011 kl. 20:55 skrev Ravindran Parthasarathi:

> Hi Roman,
>  
> RTCWeb application within Enterprise looks the reasonable argument for not mandating ICE & SRTP in RTCWeb browser  because Enterprise shall be visualized as single reachable private network with no NAT & SRTP requirement. ICE & SRTP are overhead within Enterprise.
We need to consider the dual stack need for ICE as well. It's not only NAT. And this may happen within the enterprise.

/O
>  
> In case I understand you correctly, RTCWeb API should provide the mechanism to include ICE & SRTP on the need basis.
>  
> Thanks
> Partha
>  
>  
>  
> From: rtcweb-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:rtcweb-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Roman Shpount
> Sent: Wednesday, September 28, 2011 12:08 AM
> To: Matthew Kaufman
> Cc: rtcweb@ietf.org
> Subject: Re: [rtcweb] Requiring ICE for RTC calls
>  
> What about intranet applications that would want to locally call existing IP phones within the same enterprise? Should we force them to go through a media gateway as well or should we allow to overwrite this using a policy?
> 
> As far as SRTP is concerned, once again we should at least provide a local policy. Otherwise it would be a real problem to test and debug this.
> _____________
> Roman Shpount
> 
> 
> On Tue, Sep 27, 2011 at 1:30 PM, Matthew Kaufman <matthew.kaufman@skype.net> wrote:
> On 9/27/11 10:01 AM, Justin Uberti wrote:
> Neither Google Voice nor Skype (both fairly popular services) send raw RTP directly from the client to a PSTN terminator.
>  
> True.
>  
> 
> I can't speak for Skype, but Google Voice uses a media gateway for the quality-related reasons I mentioned earlier.
>  
> I can't speak for Skype either, but this is a good guess.
>  
> 
> 
> Since these large-scale services can deploy media gateways, it's clear that this is not a significant impediment.
>  
> Agree. I'm not at all sure what the argument is that we need existing-PSTN-gateway-compatible RTP (without SRTP or ICE). If there is demand, these gateways will be upgraded to support RTCWeb. If there is not, service providers can run intermediate gateways.
> 
> Matthew Kaufman
> 
>  
> _______________________________________________
> rtcweb mailing list
> rtcweb@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rtcweb

---
* Olle E Johansson - oej@edvina.net
* Cell phone +46 70 593 68 51, Office +46 8 96 40 20, Sweden