IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [rtcweb] WG Last Call for draft-ietf-rtcweb-stun-consent-freshness

"Makaraju, Maridi Raju (Raju)" <Raju.Makaraju@alcatel-lucent.com> Mon, 25 August 2014 18:01 UTC

Return-Path: <Raju.Makaraju@alcatel-lucent.com>
X-Original-To: rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 99CBA1A01DC for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 25 Aug 2014 11:01:45 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.567
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.567 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.668] autolearn=ham
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 9-zPfSrs1Xz8 for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 25 Aug 2014 11:01:43 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from smtp-us.alcatel-lucent.com (us-hpatc-esg-01.alcatel-lucent.com [135.245.18.27]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C2BB61A01AF for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Mon, 25 Aug 2014 11:01:12 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from us70uusmtp3.zam.alcatel-lucent.com (unknown [135.5.2.65]) by Websense Email Security Gateway with ESMTPS id 2EBC6C56364CB; Mon, 25 Aug 2014 18:01:07 +0000 (GMT)
Received: from US70TWXCHHUB03.zam.alcatel-lucent.com (us70twxchhub03.zam.alcatel-lucent.com [135.5.2.35]) by us70uusmtp3.zam.alcatel-lucent.com (GMO) with ESMTP id s7PI1A7G007953 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=FAIL); Mon, 25 Aug 2014 14:01:10 -0400
Received: from US70UWXCHMBA02.zam.alcatel-lucent.com ([169.254.8.175]) by US70TWXCHHUB03.zam.alcatel-lucent.com ([135.5.2.35]) with mapi id 14.02.0247.003; Mon, 25 Aug 2014 14:01:10 -0400
From: "Makaraju, Maridi Raju (Raju)" <Raju.Makaraju@alcatel-lucent.com>
To: Roman Shpount <roman@telurix.com>, Martin Thomson <martin.thomson@gmail.com>
Thread-Topic: [rtcweb] WG Last Call for draft-ietf-rtcweb-stun-consent-freshness
Thread-Index: AQHPvCyeYIc/MFSTfk+VKNIJfUtwNpvbPhKAgAABDwCAABPQgIAApK+AgACJRYCAAEiyvoAASoGAgASEIQOAAE2pgP//vb5Q
Date: Mon, 25 Aug 2014 18:01:10 +0000
Message-ID: <E1FE4C082A89A246A11D7F32A95A17828E52F5F0@US70UWXCHMBA02.zam.alcatel-lucent.com>
References: <CA+9kkMCZT1XW4LLaJ4Nq2DbrxD59cYnjLo5JXn9fjEb8pyamaQ@mail.gmail.com> <7594FB04B1934943A5C02806D1A2204B1D41CDC3@ESESSMB209.ericsson.se> <CAKz0y8zycsyr9m4BA=-8xOaWkU+Sog5Mbz7K-oN3woqi++mVzg@mail.gmail.com> <53F451CF.10705@alvestrand.no> <001b01cfbc94$fccd5310$f667f930$@co.in> <CAKz0y8zNM3rc3XC6JqrK+d4hXiT5TomhNM+W2twg0+-83-pFow@mail.gmail.com> <CABkgnnUnfB5bskH4zWRfBMdHbSoqftV5Fo_GEXoLt9XCH9Tt_w@mail.gmail.com> <CAD5OKxsT9Vdm0=tjk9WsLAH4ekbAizgyjm--168TrOf8UAYGZw@mail.gmail.com> <CABkgnnXUpibu8kWYmbJJJT2J3RNGXFV8LbceLijgG0U-pGY2xQ@mail.gmail.com> <CAKz0y8z_oBf2efavfOLgzqE1R8sZstefZ1tvwwJLkhRskXZERQ@mail.gmail.com> <CAD5OKxsSqA=cki_fSaqAPP0GXCv_kHr6571C+K9ze4ceHCGYdQ@mail.gmail.com> <7594FB04B1934943A5C02806D1A2204B1D427B68@ESESSMB209.ericsson.se> <D01D6B42.104F8%rmohanr@cisco.com> <009001cfbe4f$6b92f280$42b8d780$@co.in> <CAKz0y8y3=0_-jwWiviR_Uj6tSq75NEq92Ocergc_NvFk2h_72Q@mail.gmail.com> <CAD5OKxugaPq=cLppPUqT8CUADV-E2zDMcz6m3sUgKOnK-TdQfQ@mail.gmail.com> <CABkgnnU6kv+=jQuxj4Ci-zYW9mHEfJ=6jqqrdqDTopPN06-kgw@mail.gmail.com> <CAD5OKxu=9X2um+EebZzp3isY-R_-NqyOgH+bWj55+_Q8qXfrqg@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAD5OKxu=9X2um+EebZzp3isY-R_-NqyOgH+bWj55+_Q8qXfrqg@mail.gmail.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-originating-ip: [135.5.27.16]
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_E1FE4C082A89A246A11D7F32A95A17828E52F5F0US70UWXCHMBA02z_"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/rtcweb/hfeZRhluSDN-eksXefBghlpf6aY
Cc: "rtcweb@ietf.org" <rtcweb@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [rtcweb] WG Last Call for draft-ietf-rtcweb-stun-consent-freshness
X-BeenThere: rtcweb@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
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: Mon, 25 Aug 2014 18:01:46 -0000

Agree with Roman.
I don’t think outlawing ICE-lite is acceptable.
Btw, why are we changing the topic from ICE-lite’s support of consent-freshness to WebRTC support of ICE-lite?! ☺

BR
Raju

From: rtcweb [mailto:rtcweb-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Roman Shpount
Sent: Monday, August 25, 2014 12:54 PM
To: Martin Thomson
Cc: rtcweb@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [rtcweb] WG Last Call for draft-ietf-rtcweb-stun-consent-freshness

On Mon, Aug 25, 2014 at 1:15 PM, Martin Thomson <martin.thomson@gmail.com<mailto:martin.thomson@gmail.com>> wrote:
Let's try this instead:

Any WebRTC entity MUST implement full ICE

Any entity performing full ICE MUST implement consent

Done.

We are still going to get a fair number of WebRTC gateways that implement ICE-lite who will disagree. Unless this group will outlaw ICE-lite the way it did SDES-SRTP (for the very similar security reasons), the caveat for ICE-lite should stay.
_____________
Roman Shpount

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email