[rtcweb] #5: Section 4.2.1
"rtcweb issue tracker" <trac+rtcweb@trac.tools.ietf.org> Sat, 16 February 2013 21:54 UTC
Return-Path: <trac+rtcweb@trac.tools.ietf.org>
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 2122321F89A6 for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 16 Feb 2013 13:54:06 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -102.599
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
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 OHpxgdSQxa0L for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 16 Feb 2013 13:54:05 -0800 (PST)
Received: from grenache.tools.ietf.org (grenache.tools.ietf.org [IPv6:2a01:3f0:1:2::30]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 119C321F8895 for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Sat, 16 Feb 2013 13:54:04 -0800 (PST)
Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:52850 helo=grenache.tools.ietf.org ident=www-data) by grenache.tools.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from <trac+rtcweb@trac.tools.ietf.org>) id 1U6phq-0001Xg-8U; Sat, 16 Feb 2013 22:54:02 +0100
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
From: rtcweb issue tracker <trac+rtcweb@trac.tools.ietf.org>
X-Trac-Version: 0.12.3
Precedence: bulk
Auto-Submitted: auto-generated
X-Mailer: Trac 0.12.3, by Edgewall Software
To: draft-ietf-rtcweb-security@tools.ietf.org, bernard_aboba@hotmail.com
X-Trac-Project: rtcweb
Date: Sat, 16 Feb 2013 21:54:02 -0000
X-URL: http://tools.ietf.org/rtcweb/
X-Trac-Ticket-URL: http://wiki.tools.ietf.org/wg/rtcweb/trac/ticket/5
Message-ID: <066.79dcbbef3c0b3c277e6368d5df477815@trac.tools.ietf.org>
X-Trac-Ticket-ID: 5
X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: 127.0.0.1
X-SA-Exim-Rcpt-To: draft-ietf-rtcweb-security@tools.ietf.org, bernard_aboba@hotmail.com, rtcweb@ietf.org
X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: trac+rtcweb@trac.tools.ietf.org
X-SA-Exim-Scanned: No (on grenache.tools.ietf.org); SAEximRunCond expanded to false
Resent-To: ekr@rtfm.com
Resent-Message-Id: <20130216215405.119C321F8895@ietfa.amsl.com>
Resent-Date: Sat, 16 Feb 2013 13:54:04 -0800
Resent-From: trac+rtcweb@trac.tools.ietf.org
Cc: rtcweb@ietf.org
Subject: [rtcweb] #5: Section 4.2.1
X-BeenThere: rtcweb@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
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: Sat, 16 Feb 2013 21:54:06 -0000
#5: Section 4.2.1
There also needs to be some mechanism for the browser to verify that
the target of the traffic continues to wish to receive it.
Obviously, some ICE-based mechanism will work here, but it has been
observed that because ICE keepalives are indications, they will not
work here, so some other mechanism is needed.
[[ OPEN ISSUE: Do we need some way of verifying the expected traffic
rate, not just consent to receive traffic at all.]]
[BA] Since I believe we've figured this out, can we clean up the above
paragraph and OPEN ISSUE?
--
-------------------------------------+-------------------------------------
Reporter: | Owner: draft-ietf-rtcweb-
bernard_aboba@hotmail.com | security@tools.ietf.org
Type: defect | Status: new
Priority: major | Milestone: milestone1
Component: security | Version: 1.0
Severity: In WG Last Call | Keywords:
-------------------------------------+-------------------------------------
Ticket URL: <http://wiki.tools.ietf.org/wg/rtcweb/trac/ticket/5>
rtcweb <http://tools.ietf.org/rtcweb/>
- [rtcweb] #5: Section 4.2.1 rtcweb issue tracker