IETF Logo Mail Archive

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

Bernard Aboba <bernard_aboba@hotmail.com> Thu, 05 January 2012 15:18 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 D9E7A21F8750 for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 5 Jan 2012 07:18:38 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -101.615
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-101.615 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.412, BAYES_00=-2.599, MIME_QP_LONG_LINE=1.396, 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 hP1+1pqaqVBw for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 5 Jan 2012 07:18:38 -0800 (PST)
Received: from dub0-omc1-s15.dub0.hotmail.com (dub0-omc1-s15.dub0.hotmail.com [157.55.0.214]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2314521F8719 for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Thu, 5 Jan 2012 07:18:37 -0800 (PST)
Received: from DUB0-P3-EAS41 ([157.55.0.237]) by dub0-omc1-s15.dub0.hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.4675); Thu, 5 Jan 2012 07:18:33 -0800
X-Originating-IP: [24.17.217.162]
X-Originating-Email: [bernard_aboba@hotmail.com]
Message-ID: <DUB0-P3-EAS41D56ABF6F29F316359A2993940@phx.gbl>
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> <4F035DD5.3050305@jesup.org> <CAOJ7v-1dziaA_ePCuMxjn6uhBgOH=ZVybUmLBwQi5qiuyOzDMA@mail.gmail.com> <BLU152-W469B2EB104C104547FC42393960@phx.gbl> <CAD5OKxuE0VhSsjKggj1mLOseLeDXarujvAG44yHkuZttagJggw@mail.gmail.com> <CAKhHsXHnT2p7yncha5-BQ=-Lzk3-N+tuijM-UqwfP1mPUi173A@mail.gmail.com> <CAD5OKxuH4v2Cs4Wx2SermhqX0SdH_rXUYgMms1UV3xo1_EsN-Q@mail.gmail.com> <CA+9kkMCXACEo0QOLR-pw0AHuRJzKuKEiL7E5Oh8va9wWuFmbow@mail.gmail.com> <BLU152-W587F56E976F80F9BA6308493940@phx.gbl> <CAD5OKxtkKxUC2RNibk-9+R8LqVdsaY_19DCgB=rFDjpxQVGCnQ@mail.gmail.com> <4F052B03.8090101@jesup.org> <CAD5OKxv+nsk7082URKz5hDbWhgGFAGx6st0TrWTsph+7NKPPiw@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
From: Bernard Aboba <bernard_aboba@hotmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
In-Reply-To: <CAD5OKxv+nsk7082URKz5hDbWhgGFAGx6st0TrWTsph+7NKPPiw@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 05 Jan 2012 07:19:31 -0800
To: Roman Shpount <roman@telurix.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0 (1.0)
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 05 Jan 2012 15:18:33.0583 (UTC) FILETIME=[49E3DFF0:01CCCBBD]
Cc: Randell Jesup <randell-ietf@jesup.org>, "rtcweb@ietf.org" <rtcweb@ietf.org>
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: Thu, 05 Jan 2012 15:18:39 -0000

On Jan 5, 2012, at 3:56, "Roman Shpount" <roman@telurix.com> 
> 
> At this point we might as well design a new protocol.

[BA] That seems like a precipitous conclusion, given that we haven't even come up with a set of requirements and evaluated existing protocols against them. On the other hand, the security draft contains "modified" versions of existing schemes (thrown in without WG consensus), so it's not like that is defensible either.

>  My main concern is a barrier to entry in implementation of anything that communicates with WebRTC. 

WebRTC will by nature have a high bar.  The question is if the bar is high that we still have interop issues 5+ years from now.

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email