Re: [rtcweb] WGLC of draft-ietf-rtcweb-use-cases-and-requirements-11

[Sergio Garcia Murillo <[e-mail]>]

+1

Shouldn't we add it as a requirement also?

Best regards
Sergio
El 17/09/2013 14:00, Magnus Westerlund escribió:
> 3.2.3.1.  Description
>
>     This use-case is almost identical to the Simple Video Communication
>     Service use-case (Section 3.2.1).  The difference is that one of the
>     users is behind a FW that only allows http traffic.
>
> If a firewall only allows HTTP traffic, then can we really assume that
> the firewall administrator per default will accept WebRTC Media and Data
> traffic?
>
> I am far from certain of this, and think on a requirement level needs to
> express a situation where the firewall administrator allows WebRTC
> across its FW, or at least can easily configure a rule to block it. Thus
> resulting in that any solution for this needs to be easily identifiable
> and possible to block.