IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [rtcweb] [MMUSIC] Default proto transport in JSEP

Adam Roach <adam@nostrum.com> Wed, 28 November 2018 18:22 UTC

Return-Path: <adam@nostrum.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 AEDEE130E8B; Wed, 28 Nov 2018 10:22:55 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.878
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.878 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, T_SPF_HELO_PERMERROR=0.01, T_SPF_PERMERROR=0.01, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id tduxKwfoFCY5; Wed, 28 Nov 2018 10:22:54 -0800 (PST)
Received: from nostrum.com (raven-v6.nostrum.com [IPv6:2001:470:d:1130::1]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 7DDFF130E6E; Wed, 28 Nov 2018 10:22:54 -0800 (PST)
Received: from Svantevit.roach.at (99-152-146-228.lightspeed.dllstx.sbcglobal.net [99.152.146.228]) (authenticated bits=0) by nostrum.com (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTPSA id wASIMoJM005405 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128 verify=NO); Wed, 28 Nov 2018 12:22:52 -0600 (CST) (envelope-from adam@nostrum.com)
X-Authentication-Warning: raven.nostrum.com: Host 99-152-146-228.lightspeed.dllstx.sbcglobal.net [99.152.146.228] claimed to be Svantevit.roach.at
To: Roman Shpount <roman@telurix.com>, Cullen Jennings <fluffy@iii.ca>
Cc: RTCWeb IETF <rtcweb@ietf.org>, mmusic WG <mmusic@ietf.org>
References: <CA+9kkMADnZJBaV0hfLuwGU0bGBEP5tCPZ=8Zd_85Dgzi37ghAQ@mail.gmail.com> <CAD5OKxsNFFmER__H0+5Mzts58yn9cWLMEADhSnLR4nreKD9WAQ@mail.gmail.com> <9B9B741B-622F-4565-899B-700636408F6C@iii.ca> <CAD5OKxv9r08RLvMSM4h11A6sXU9E=u_8Qvy-TBfjNcwkhcqf3w@mail.gmail.com> <54ebb208-e7b3-a0f1-6a5c-4745d3a56447@cisco.com> <CAD5OKxut5Lr+Bmyc20y+vV=+_RESw+h72DYLnt3G1_BjS6sTVA@mail.gmail.com> <1346FE48-5D61-48B7-BF37-3D7BAA930DB0@iii.ca> <CAD5OKxv0N+TF3L3bB9KPm4vqQdPZKE=1zkdw1PaV7CpNJ2kYaQ@mail.gmail.com>
From: Adam Roach <adam@nostrum.com>
Message-ID: <110dc822-b3be-7bc2-dcc5-9e6c8277e0d1@nostrum.com>
Date: Wed, 28 Nov 2018 12:22:45 -0600
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.13; rv:60.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/60.3.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <CAD5OKxv0N+TF3L3bB9KPm4vqQdPZKE=1zkdw1PaV7CpNJ2kYaQ@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="------------121809D2425E31FF0A2953BA"
Content-Language: en-US
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/rtcweb/g5gPmSF106Npwbh_PhJvePvRUbQ>
Subject: Re: [rtcweb] [MMUSIC] Default proto transport in JSEP
X-BeenThere: rtcweb@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
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: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/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 Nov 2018 18:22:56 -0000

On 11/28/18 10:57 AM, Roman Shpount wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 28, 2018 at 11:38 AM Cullen Jennings <fluffy@iii.ca 
> <mailto:fluffy@iii.ca>> wrote:
>
>>     On Nov 27, 2018, at 4:46 PM, Roman Shpount <roman@telurix.com
>>     <mailto:roman@telurix.com>> wrote:
>>
>>     I suggest to update JSEP section 5.1.2 to match the rest of the
>>     documents to say that "UDP/TLS/RTP/SAVPF" proto MUST be used
>>     during ICE restart. When ICE restart is not in progress,
>>     "UDP/TLS/RTP/SAVPF"proto MUST be used if default (only) candidate
>>     is a UDP candidate and "TCP/TLS/RTP/SAVPF" proto MUST be used if
>>     default (only) candidate is TCP candidate.
>
>     I don’t see any real befits to implementations to this change and
>     I don’t think the rtcweb consensus was around the currently
>     solution. Do you see some advantage to implementations to this?
>
>
> This is what every other document related to ICE, including JSEP 
> section 5.2.2 currently specifies. It was also consensus in MMUSIC. I 
> think RTCWEB need a really good reason why it needs to be different.


It would probably help clarify things if you quoted the parts of the 
document that you think are in conflict. I can't find any explicit 
<proto> field handling in 5.2.2.

In terms of changing technical aspects of JSEP: the only reason the 
document is out of the RFC Editor's queue right now is to address issues 
arising from rationalizing the reference to RFC 8445 within Cluster 238. 
This is not an opportunity to re-litigate previously settled consensus 
decisions. Technical issues such as the one at hand should have been 
raised during WG development, WG last call, or -- in extremis, since 
you're a regular RTCWEB participant -- during IETF last call. It's up to 
the chairs what to allow, but I wouldn't expect anything other than 
catastrophic flaws to be open for change at this time.

/a

v2.28.0 | Report a Bug | By Email | System Status