Re: [rtcweb] DTLS, DTLS-SRTP, and 5-tuples

[Christer Holmberg <[e-mail]>]

Hi Justin,

>>>>>> New things can be defined in the future. When they do, they should treat ICE a virtual communication channel that
>>>>>> provides unreliable packet transport with no order guarantees which can span multiple 5-tuples.
>>>>>
>>>>> Then the scope of what we discuss now should not be "whatever protocol" - it should be the specific protocols we are discussing.
>>>>
>>>> I think ICE-bis should define protocol requirements for the protocols that can run on top of ICE, which includes:
>>>> 1. Ability to run over unreliable packet based transport with no order guarantees
>>>> 2. Ability to demux with STUN packets
>>>> 3. Not make any assumption about IP addresses, ports, or other transport level protocols attributes such as TOS. 
>>>
>>> I think these are good criteria. Note that TCP would meet these criteria, and I see no problem running TCP atop ICE (we used to do this in an old version of our data channel code).
>>
>> I don't think a TCP connection can span over multiple 5-tuples - each TCP connection will be bound to one 5-tuple.
>
> I don't agree. SCTP can be tunneled over UDP, as we know, so why not TCP? The ports in such a tunnel scenario are just as unnecessary as in SCTP over UDP. 

We need to be clear about what we mean.

When I say "TCP", I mean plain TCP :)

If we talk about TCP-over-UDP, we should say "TCP-over-UDP" :)

Regards,

Christer