Re: [rtcweb] AVPF [was: Encryption mandate (and offer/answer)]

Stefan Håkansson LK <stefan.lk.hakansson@ericsson.com> Mon, 12 September 2011 06:34 UTC

Return-Path: <stefan.lk.hakansson@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 16B5221F8509 for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 11 Sep 2011 23:34:57 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -6.314
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.314 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.015, BAYES_00=-2.599, MIME_8BIT_HEADER=0.3, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4]
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 0AcVcYaQZxSf for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 11 Sep 2011 23:34:56 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mailgw10.se.ericsson.net (mailgw10.se.ericsson.net [193.180.251.61]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3C5DB21F84FC for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Sun, 11 Sep 2011 23:34:56 -0700 (PDT)
X-AuditID: c1b4fb3d-b7c47ae000000b17-3e-4e6da88aa84b
Received: from esessmw0256.eemea.ericsson.se (Unknown_Domain [153.88.253.125]) by mailgw10.se.ericsson.net (Symantec Mail Security) with SMTP id 5B.50.02839.A88AD6E4; Mon, 12 Sep 2011 08:36:58 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from [150.132.141.36] (153.88.115.8) by esessmw0256.eemea.ericsson.se (153.88.115.97) with Microsoft SMTP Server id 8.3.137.0; Mon, 12 Sep 2011 08:36:57 +0200
Message-ID: <4E6DA889.8030306@ericsson.com>
Date: Mon, 12 Sep 2011 08:36:57 +0200
From: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Stefan_H=E5kansson_LK?= <stefan.lk.hakansson@ericsson.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.0; rv:6.0.2) Gecko/20110902 Thunderbird/6.0.2
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: rtcweb@ietf.org
References: <A444A0F8084434499206E78C106220CA0B00FDB08B@MCHP058A.global-ad.net> <4E67C3F7.7020304@jesup.org> <BE60FA11-8FFF-48E5-9F83-4D84A7FBE2BE@vidyo.com> <4E67F003.6000108@jesup.org> <7F2072F1E0DE894DA4B517B93C6A05852233E8554C@ESESSCMS0356.eemea.ericsson.se> <C3759687E4991243A1A0BD44EAC8230339CA68F054@BE235.mail.lan> <CAOJ7v-2u0UuNXh7bzmZFwiSucbsh=Ps=C3ZM5M3cJrXRmZgODA@mail.gmail.com> <CAKhHsXHXCkNdjtpxCSCk+ABbtxY15GEgouE6X6-sn-LqhnidQw@mail.gmail.com> <4E6A56D4.2030602@skype.net> <CABcZeBOdP6cAqBoiSV-Vdv1_EK3DfgnMamT3t3ccjDOMfELfBw@mail.gmail.com> <CAKhHsXFdU1ZaKQF8hbsOxwTS-_RfmFqQhgzGe=K4mRp+wz+_nQ@mail.gmail.com> <4E6A81EC.3080002@jesup.org> <4E6AE22A.2070106@alum.mit.edu> <7F2072F1E0DE894DA4B517B93C6A05852233C3B7C5@ESESSCMS0356.eemea.ericsson.se> <4E6C16FF.1000706@jesup.org> <BBF498F2D030E84AB1179E24D1AC41D61C1BCA829D@ESESSCMS0362.eemea.ericsson.se> <4E6CB9F7.2060208@mozilla.com> <CAD5OKxssKpF0i-+HmN+3f5nOdxasgwC-WEMPkiiO9iycBezmkQ@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAD5OKxssKpF0i-+HmN+3f5nOdxasgwC-WEMPkiiO9iycBezmkQ@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Brightmail-Tracker: AAAAAA==
Subject: Re: [rtcweb] AVPF [was: Encryption mandate (and offer/answer)]
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, 12 Sep 2011 06:34:57 -0000

Agree fully. The SDP o/a is IMO there to set up media streams already 
agreed on (including level of protection) using other means.

On 2011-09-12 04:58, Roman Shpount wrote:
> I guess what I do not understand in this discussion is why do we need to
> negotiate all of this in the offer/answer. We need something that can
> interop with offer answer, but no more then that. The client JavaScript
> application should have control and ability to specify what kind of
> offer is generated. We can use the exisitng HTTP connection to get all
> the additional restrictions and options for the call. It is normally
> known to the application if the security is needed and supported. The
> functionality of figuring out device capabilities and user intent of
> this call (secure call to the bank or public video chat) should be left
> to the application and should not be part of this specification. What's
> currently is missing is ability to transmit and receive media. The rest
> of the features, such as getting events including new call event from
> the server, sending events to the server, maintaining a persistent
> connection from behind firewall and NAT is already present in the
> current web infrastructure. We do not need a new signaling protocol or
> standard. We do not need to add an existing signaling protocol not
> implemented by the browser such as SIP. It adds no new functionality and
> makes standard bigger and more difficult to comply. All that is needed
> is media.
> _____________
> Roman Shpount
>
>
> On Sun, Sep 11, 2011 at 9:39 AM, Timothy B. Terriberry
> <tterriberry@mozilla.com <mailto:tterriberry@mozilla.com>> wrote:
>
>         * The level of media protection to use (NONE, SDES-SRTP or
>         DTLS-SRTP) should be set by the web app
>
>
>     Why wouldn't this devolve to, "Don't communicate anything. Instead,
>     try to create a PeerConnection with DTLS-SRTP, and when that fails,
>     try to create a second one with NONE," in the actual webapp.
>
>     Or, more likely, since NONE will have a better chance of working
>     with legacy devices, "Try to create a PeerConnection with NONE, and
>     when that fails, try to create a second one with DTLS-SRTP."
>     Assuming anyone bothers with the second step. Having the choice of
>     SDES-SRTP or DTLS-SRTP will also make it more likely people won't
>     bother with either, as they won't know which one to use. We can try
>     to create incentives with browser chrome, but there's only so much
>     that can do.
>
>     _________________________________________________
>     rtcweb mailing list
>     rtcweb@ietf.org <mailto:rtcweb@ietf.org>
>     https://www.ietf.org/mailman/__listinfo/rtcweb
>     <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rtcweb>
>
>