Re: [rtcweb] Solutions sought for non-ICE RTC calls, not +1 (Re: Requiring ICE for RTC calls)

Cameron Byrne <cb.list6@gmail.com> Wed, 28 September 2011 15:07 UTC

Return-Path: <cb.list6@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 B28FE21F8C99 for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 28 Sep 2011 08:07:33 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -3.263
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.263 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.035, BAYES_00=-2.599, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, MIME_8BIT_HEADER=0.3, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1]
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 Uqruqb9ODtu0 for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 28 Sep 2011 08:07:33 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-yi0-f44.google.com (mail-yi0-f44.google.com [209.85.218.44]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id EBBAB21F8C92 for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Wed, 28 Sep 2011 08:07:32 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by yic13 with SMTP id 13so7685430yic.31 for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Wed, 28 Sep 2011 08:10:21 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type; bh=w4lbZAXYIDtz8lYSmqXlMZ7RD9R6ZTGBBr/PdcG/gGg=; b=GajuggF1HhGdjFAOMT9nLlgAlsA1+KeHiBXxB2ChyPQ7PmlhmGRomWscOXs31S+mRl 8Sn2et97aTSe3PtxJ10U5tjFtXlfIsMOgsvnclMAu6n2VkiJtosKk/wasZcReqGtXDjT 2e81XyFFUA+JyogVFBFt4PYAbf9IpWpw41kDc=
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.68.71.193 with SMTP id x1mr44555733pbu.132.1317222620055; Wed, 28 Sep 2011 08:10:20 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.142.89.1 with HTTP; Wed, 28 Sep 2011 08:10:19 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.142.89.1 with HTTP; Wed, 28 Sep 2011 08:10:19 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <CALiegfnC9qB+gjMAqg_511oPcEbm4B=uSO_ZQOrZ+F+DVtwZ2w@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAD5OKxtNjmWBz92bRuxka7e-BUpTPgVUvr3ahJGpmZ-U5nuPbQ@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> <CALiegfmL4VSRE+kgs5kXzQc3mCHnKpU-EAbVPKO4QNEYLKje=A@mail.gmail.com> <4E821E47.4080205@alvestrand.no> <CALiegfndBhod6Hoq6h63795x8f=ew28rDys=Fx8ScwVpVJwp1Q@mail.gmail.com> <CABcZeBOoF6MNSpATG2+_e99iRq7Jf9OoWWNCa=qRGW_v+maoHA@mail.gmail.com> <CAD5OKxubnxLAqybCgnBXpKR9S0rBEsoDg9enCaverjVWYad7Ew@mail.gmail.com> <4E8265D3.5020809@skype.net> <CALiegfnC9qB+gjMAqg_511oPcEbm4B=uSO_ZQOrZ+F+DVtwZ2w@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 28 Sep 2011 08:10:19 -0700
Message-ID: <CAD6AjGSQi0M6TKN+==9NvHdEmdWfPeCOJA7RKtoaDjFq+7z90A@mail.gmail.com>
From: Cameron Byrne <cb.list6@gmail.com>
To: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?I=F1aki_Baz_Castillo?= <ibc@aliax.net>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=bcaec544f0985bc73004ae01ca84
Cc: rtcweb@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [rtcweb] Solutions sought for non-ICE RTC calls, not +1 (Re: 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: Wed, 28 Sep 2011 15:07:33 -0000

On Sep 28, 2011 1:36 AM, "Iñaki Baz Castillo" <ibc@aliax.net> wrote:
>
> 2011/9/28 Matthew Kaufman <matthew.kaufman@skype.net>et>:
> > ICE needs to be a MUST. Debate is still going on support (or not) for
plain
> > RTP.
>
> After all these threads, now I strongly consider that ICE should be a
MUST.
>
> But I don't think the same for SRTP. I don't consider that content
> carried via plain RTP is more important than content carried via HTTP,
> and AFAIK HTTPS is not a requirement in RFC 2616, neither in any web
> browser.
>

Everytime we design a new voip product or concept, I am always told by the
product management people that users expect security with voice calls on the
internet or any public access network. Examples include gsm, umts, gan, uma,
skype and the various sip implementations for IMS over the internet...
granted, not all public sip services are secure.

The end result is that users may not require it upfront, but they will be
shocked and angry when some blog post shows how anyone on a public WLAN can
effortlessly wiretap their calls, and possibly intercept personal credit
card and medical information that is commonly shared on a voice call.

In this day and age, I think it has been proven, to me at least, that end to
end encryption is always required and we would be simply negligent to not
require encyption of the media and signalling.

Cb
> --
> Iñaki Baz Castillo
> <ibc@aliax.net>
> _______________________________________________
> rtcweb mailing list
> rtcweb@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rtcweb