Re: [rtcweb] Let's define the purpose of WebRTC

Hadriel Kaplan <HKaplan@acmepacket.com> Mon, 07 November 2011 01:17 UTC

Return-Path: <HKaplan@acmepacket.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 C1A9F21F87C5 for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 6 Nov 2011 17:17:53 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.313
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.313 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.014, BAYES_00=-2.599, MIME_8BIT_HEADER=0.3]
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 JGY4NtS2TosJ for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 6 Nov 2011 17:17:53 -0800 (PST)
Received: from etmail.acmepacket.com (etmail.acmepacket.com [216.41.24.6]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4253121F877F for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Sun, 6 Nov 2011 17:17:52 -0800 (PST)
Received: from MAIL2.acmepacket.com (10.0.0.22) by etmail.acmepacket.com (216.41.24.6) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 8.2.254.0; Sun, 6 Nov 2011 20:17:51 -0500
Received: from MAIL1.acmepacket.com ([169.254.1.232]) by Mail2.acmepacket.com ([169.254.2.157]) with mapi id 14.01.0270.001; Sun, 6 Nov 2011 20:17:51 -0500
From: Hadriel Kaplan <HKaplan@acmepacket.com>
To: =?iso-8859-1?Q?Jos=E9_Luis_Mill=E1n?= <jmillan@aliax.net>
Thread-Topic: [rtcweb] Let's define the purpose of WebRTC
Thread-Index: AQHMnOsQU1Ft+mkH70qnimGgVzJd/A==
Date: Mon, 7 Nov 2011 01:17:50 +0000
Message-ID: <E3603BBD-A736-42CF-A575-E74D807477A7@acmepacket.com>
References: <CALiegfkVNVAs_MyU_-4koA4zRwSn1-FwLjY9g_oZVkhi9rSK5Q@mail.gmail.com> <8A61D801-D14D-408B-9875-63C37D0CC166@acmepacket.com> <CABw3bnPE=OY_h5bM7GA6wgrXiOBL8P4J0kw1jLv-GSpHAbg=Cg@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CABw3bnPE=OY_h5bM7GA6wgrXiOBL8P4J0kw1jLv-GSpHAbg=Cg@mail.gmail.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-originating-ip: [216.41.24.34]
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-ID: <11504C381BEA7442AFEECC5F69DDB4E7@acmepacket.com>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Brightmail-Tracker: AAAAAQAAAWE=
Cc: "<rtcweb@ietf.org>" <rtcweb@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [rtcweb] Let's define the purpose of WebRTC
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: Mon, 07 Nov 2011 01:17:53 -0000

On Nov 6, 2011, at 4:16 AM, José Luis Millán wrote:

> draft-ietf-rtcweb-overview-02 downgraded the SRTP concerns from
> mandatory-to-use to mandatory-to-implement. So if it does not
> downgrade anymore, a WebRTC implementation (game app, greeting cards
> website..) will have to implement SRTP.

Technically, no... a mandatory-to-implement means devices complying with WebRTC RFCs (namely browsers) must implement support for it, but not have to use it for every session.  So a game app, greeting card, etc., web application could choose not to use SRTP, just like it chooses to use HTTP rather than HTTPS.  That's all I'm talking about: that difference of mandatory-to-implement vs. mandatory-to-use requirement.  

-hadriel