Re: [rtcweb] No Interim on SDES at this juncture

Magnus Westerlund <magnus.westerlund@ericsson.com> Fri, 14 June 2013 07:43 UTC

Return-Path: <prvs=98771d30af=magnus.westerlund@ericsson.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 5F08F21F9C0C for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 14 Jun 2013 00:43:24 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -106.249
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-106.249 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.000, BAYES_00=-2.599, HELO_EQ_SE=0.35, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
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 W6K0Ewcd35VR for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 14 Jun 2013 00:43:17 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mailgw1.ericsson.se (mailgw1.ericsson.se [193.180.251.45]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0B12921F9C29 for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Fri, 14 Jun 2013 00:43:16 -0700 (PDT)
X-AuditID: c1b4fb2d-b7f5d6d000003d54-ae-51bac993114c
Received: from esessmw0256.eemea.ericsson.se (Unknown_Domain [153.88.253.125]) by mailgw1.ericsson.se (Symantec Mail Security) with SMTP id 26.0B.15700.399CAB15; Fri, 14 Jun 2013 09:43:15 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from [127.0.0.1] (153.88.115.8) by esessmw0256.eemea.ericsson.se (153.88.115.97) with Microsoft SMTP Server id 8.3.279.1; Fri, 14 Jun 2013 09:43:15 +0200
Message-ID: <51BAC9BC.6070708@ericsson.com>
Date: Fri, 14 Jun 2013 09:43:56 +0200
From: Magnus Westerlund <magnus.westerlund@ericsson.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; rv:17.0) Gecko/20130509 Thunderbird/17.0.6
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Hadriel Kaplan <hadriel.kaplan@oracle.com>
References: <CA+9kkMDnjCNXGV0GU7x6gbbZMf4WiEuVvCRY8_Fix5tmdOB-Kg@mail.gmail.com> <AD220324-EEE7-4800-8512-FD7BADA9EC34@oracle.com> <CA+9kkMDY2Z_5_1uYJ1K_ZmrJB2a1-RE7V3aPqNHQg82DyagjCg@mail.gmail.com> <2975A93F-44DA-4020-B4DE-42E7ED98C08F@oracle.com>
In-Reply-To: <2975A93F-44DA-4020-B4DE-42E7ED98C08F@oracle.com>
X-Enigmail-Version: 1.5.1
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Brightmail-Tracker: H4sIAAAAAAAAA+NgFprKLMWRmVeSWpSXmKPExsUyM+Jvre7kk7sCDT5+NbT4tOkTs8Xaf+3s DkweS5b8ZPL4+PQWSwBTFLdNUmJJWXBmep6+XQJ3RuvKJraCHsGKk61N7A2M93i7GDk4JARM JKYvSexi5AQyxSQu3FvP1sXIxSEkcIpR4sy1qewQznJGiXO317GBVPEKaEvM3L6KBcRmEVCV eLZ2DTOIzSZgIXHzRyNYjahAsMSR7ZtZIOoFJU7OfMICskxEQE/i6D1OkDCzgLDEhottYCXC ApYSPd1vwMYICfwEWryMD8TmFLCTaPw4jxniOEmJLS/a2SF69SSmXG1hhLDlJZq3zobq1ZZo aOpgncAoNAvJ5llIWmYhaVnAyLyKkT03MTMnvdxwEyMwVA9u+a27g/HUOZFDjNIcLErivJZL dwYKCaQnlqRmp6YWpBbFF5XmpBYfYmTi4AQRXFINjA0feRcYHvmaXNgroniuakfUlLz0Quam zm9LvfsX3Tay31T6XKmz7rl81P0utnducszaztH2uiqmh3yX3ddqvuwwXV2iyvXz7quyuvLT 3BktDaRSi/+EfM0K2pp2sefyjRAdQSEVyxDZ/LP7xRSfnNaKvhR4msftQrHWrl//dyok/eDf LrVBiaU4I9FQi7moOBEAyd3hlSgCAAA=
Cc: rtcweb@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [rtcweb] No Interim on SDES at this juncture
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: Fri, 14 Jun 2013 07:43:24 -0000

On 2013-06-12 18:29, Hadriel Kaplan wrote:

> 
> What we had talked about back in IETF 83 (or some previous meeting) was
> whether DTLS-SRTP would be the only MTI key exchange, or whether SDES
> would also be MTI.
> We did not come to consensus in IETF 83, and tabled it for more
> discussion.  Since then it has been put at the end of the agendas,
> resulting in us running out of time for it.  At the last IETF 86 or
> Boston interim, one of the WG Chairs (I don't remember who) said we'd
> have a virtual interim dedicated to cover it.  Now we don't.  Ergo, we
> don't have a plan.

It was me that said we where going to schedule an interim meeting. Which
we chairs failed to to in the previous cycles between meetings which was
our bad.

However, this time we have proposed a time and requested people to
submit agenda items to that meeting. Don't hold us WG chairs responsible
because you in the WG aren't providing input into what should be discussed.

I see an tendency on the mailing list to shout "Security Descriptions is
important!". But, when we ask for people willing to provide a proposal
for how to integrate it, or even provide input into a discussion that
could reach a WG conclusion that Security Description or some other
additional keying than DTLS-SRTP is desired people goes silent.

Without proposals we chairs where not seeing reasons to hold this
interim meeting.

If you want to discuss this, write a draft describing how how your
additional keying is to be integrated, what the pro and cons of it. That
will enable direct discussion of a proposal. The WG clearly are
opinionated on this matter, but apparently don't have energy to produce
proposals.

Cheers

Magnus Westerlund

----------------------------------------------------------------------
Multimedia Technologies, Ericsson Research EAB/TVM
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Ericsson AB                | Phone  +46 10 7148287
Färögatan 6                | Mobile +46 73 0949079
SE-164 80 Stockholm, Sweden| mailto: magnus.westerlund@ericsson.com
----------------------------------------------------------------------