Re: [rtcweb] CNAMEs and multiple peer connections

Justin Uberti <juberti@google.com> Wed, 05 March 2014 14:31 UTC

Return-Path: <juberti@google.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 2A3481A022A for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 5 Mar 2014 06:31:08 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.925
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.925 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FM_FORGED_GMAIL=0.622, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.547, SPF_PASS=-0.001] 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 z_6AYda072gs for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 5 Mar 2014 06:31:06 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-ob0-x22a.google.com (mail-ob0-x22a.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4003:c01::22a]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3B54F1A014C for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Wed, 5 Mar 2014 06:31:06 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-ob0-f170.google.com with SMTP id uz6so1056268obc.15 for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Wed, 05 Mar 2014 06:31:02 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc:content-type; bh=c3Uh+m6niWkcOlg78jXaVUr7d8pHLC3Oh79RGzzLDT4=; b=NDJrpbWwwzxHNMERFuO5afOt6MP/L8Nrm4AaKjpm/1hwU3HMyYEnX3b9fkblynffpv tnFkCYBvo5qUK1jq7Sv7oZHp2BOkUP+Xul5vZiuEAcCqcpZzX8cFxPQapaWtuAGjJ99C bkcRhJVKT3Jj7RKL6kp1GrcA95npQ2wRD46M/2nYMBqInm5ib3k8Ql4/RRU64LJvwZQq UeDdmh4OWtyx6pE75i/C+tshb6EEh/OhvD9WDbppuROVagcxJnMjVmmTVxM3V5HXDn66 ypJmW0r8Aiiz1oroaIaMoObHQ4bjuhG1fmHzX17BFDFdpaiqKNu3ru6vsC7vR663Z2rA ygew==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc:content-type; bh=c3Uh+m6niWkcOlg78jXaVUr7d8pHLC3Oh79RGzzLDT4=; b=AUyFtasMxhnckAkL/8nvlOv0ymIoMd1dYE2qGHeRvrz9JSg4rBOb9Q1GtrkR9lPCv4 j5jpLH8kxANiCqbrCJxy9WpXesAuu5PcyM2CuGue3+ue2QQUYRoG5rdd7dlDklRFfLzI DV8z+OrDr72/CJlmTdIz/luS5GKQly/UrWbbS+Qqv97lEUfRqe3waapvwKtnhKg7HiN/ tWCF28t5HJA7rkRQvY1q/Vmn9G8ruoRDnOCvkBy3FdUDfRz5+obV1MBTgTSrOmw0eehE qz/1thaR/6icrKvqxKjXLbZXZFkiPoui7r9ROAZ/p1q/iRYQO+UKFJP2cz4WRChkNqs7 qQcA==
X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQmWe3XIukRn5PeYIDYQlZHfrLguosrfZ095raor0Yc0WcT+TR7NhgV/qYsAbr3V+hrQoFW2w3Yz4+8CWNks91WqlyXRE/bXt0wo5PUdKgKtrabPa+GsAAlmYD2Hat77WtYP31LMnZbor219vLK4RKeGTU8dPDGh5AcFQ808eeMLnfmrfZ+4xKzYgvN03OmZdbdDBwtK
X-Received: by 10.60.155.72 with SMTP id vu8mr705649oeb.60.1394029862527; Wed, 05 Mar 2014 06:31:02 -0800 (PST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.182.96.230 with HTTP; Wed, 5 Mar 2014 06:30:42 -0800 (PST)
In-Reply-To: <CABkgnnWWoCLKga7RDEmS1kDOuBPaiKaJ+_yj6-yPRSV8LVc=2A@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CABkgnnWGQ7GtKd33iF-RNbkeAyqKYshaPDDB=sAh5o-izKichQ@mail.gmail.com> <53171C20.3020001@ericsson.com> <CABkgnnWWoCLKga7RDEmS1kDOuBPaiKaJ+_yj6-yPRSV8LVc=2A@mail.gmail.com>
From: Justin Uberti <juberti@google.com>
Date: Wed, 5 Mar 2014 14:30:42 +0000
Message-ID: <CAOJ7v-1J=F-MNnBS96gt3_BXyoQB6jTCoHp0MTEBC-nWrF-BhA@mail.gmail.com>
To: Martin Thomson <martin.thomson@gmail.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=047d7bd6ab54c34f2c04f3dcde1c
Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/rtcweb/iRY49B8y-NZe-pSFiLptyrqmdSA
Cc: "rtcweb@ietf.org" <rtcweb@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [rtcweb] CNAMEs and multiple peer connections
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: Wed, 05 Mar 2014 14:31:08 -0000

I think the key thing is that it's not clear when creating a new
PeerConnection whether it should make new CNAMEs or use existing ones.

Compare the two scenarios below:

#1: audio and video over 2 PCs to the same destination
pc1 = new RTCPeerConnection();
pc2 = new RTCPeerConnection();
pc1.addStream(audioStream);
pc2.addStream(videoStream);
doCall(pc1);
doCall(pc2);
// cnames in pc1 and pc2 should be the same

#2: audio call over PC1 to destination 1, followed by audio call over PC2
to destination 2
pc1 = new RTCPeerConnection();
pc1.addStream(audioStream);
doCall(pc1);
pc2 = new RTCPeerConnection();
pc2.addStream(audioStream);
doCall(pc2);
// cnames in pc1 and pc2 should be different

I am inclined to make CNAMEs per-PeerConnection (i.e. enforce scenario #2
behavior) for 1.0, as it has a smaller downside.



On Wed, Mar 5, 2014 at 1:37 PM, Martin Thomson <martin.thomson@gmail.com>wrote;wrote:

> On 5 March 2014 12:44, Magnus Westerlund <magnus.westerlund@ericsson.com>
> wrote:
> > Martin, you talked about linking in this context. I wonder if there
> > really are an issue with linking as this is all in the same
> > communication context. Can you please make clear your concerns?
>
> I'm mostly concerned about being able to communicate with multiple
> people from the same page without revealing a linkage between sessions
> based on cert or CNAME.  It may be that we need API hooks to control
> this.
>
> As I said, I haven't thought it through fully.
>
> _______________________________________________
> rtcweb mailing list
> rtcweb@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rtcweb
>