Re: [rtcweb] WGLC for draft-ietf-rtcweb-ip-handling

Bernard Aboba <bernard.aboba@gmail.com> Wed, 11 April 2018 19:11 UTC

Return-Path: <bernard.aboba@gmail.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 2B39C1271FD for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 11 Apr 2018 12:11:04 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com
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 5P58Y8l3XcR9 for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 11 Apr 2018 12:11:02 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-pl0-x235.google.com (mail-pl0-x235.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400e:c01::235]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 87651129C56 for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Wed, 11 Apr 2018 12:11:02 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-pl0-x235.google.com with SMTP id b6-v6so2075983pla.11 for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Wed, 11 Apr 2018 12:11:02 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:subject:from:in-reply-to:date:cc :content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references:to; bh=Q8FFGL/rbDYr6jUCNb9Uu/zHL5LyPbeeuJeLy53uGaU=; b=owhSouh0sRnm4lmEG5u9oV0JmUwebRNPZTLNoz7aCVXgR4Ctmg2+TVPqaV7b9BI6Kt OfR8DFia4UTQ8d4H/vLzLQbWNVr2x5tqqwXtk2g5VbAL8X6UiyOp+3NTTYR3Lm8zOV3z 5nBrFo6+hzQgdjeXbw1JOG1juo6HAibQaEapSEJaE8QGxRWK9YxfSh0ergckjEiIDWzp Z6/zXJt2w69YO6+hyn/9mlsfxBJwLOCPE14D1bULRLB40MODgNV7Of48Cq9MJhsMPUGI cy3vdvfUfwLGt+OIHa10rMrATNg7TSTc9C+3XGAOHyv2oGddLQJ94+/8XfyIhPp4nMFP i6LQ==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:subject:from:in-reply-to:date:cc :content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references:to; bh=Q8FFGL/rbDYr6jUCNb9Uu/zHL5LyPbeeuJeLy53uGaU=; b=RJRRKJy7kdKWyFQ6wgMnG83wGD2H2MmsoPRvAOxF4F8wtCBqYDMTH9AWN3PANsHJLZ YKsFZZMwj2x1dc4/PMNd6uPFnhntKFxAJ1yupnghmUptTlm7S8CGnXM6DLXh2Sjg1Qiz rTUCfmSxtLddMZn/pI5O3uZZ2IPAOamaaAVY17Jmeh+JPJiD4LCK9Y0VWuSi2XI5CETZ S4Dk8vrZH5XxlXzX8AOMEqRaOwL8c+gR/On6e0WRGjw+LLyzS+PVCbLioeiiwq5CydTu fRyKGk7FmZskR1RMa0xQoZNf7WLlGjcVEpB6fNSL4yOoTGMqYr/Zv+hteTZmSoFpJ1er asfA==
X-Gm-Message-State: ALQs6tBtpTISy1GwoR12EX0oW3Eq8voGGf8jYnjmZ2aIuDKILLoBcyzk PH24CMbfQSf9sBIXtBIQKd1FrkVy
X-Google-Smtp-Source: AIpwx48hLQRx6xi2oXIcS2YKvjXKR15dIDvqU2SQmtM+c8/8sjtDGkt08UVvew8EJ8hOACetPQjlfw==
X-Received: by 2002:a17:902:6709:: with SMTP id f9-v6mr6501556plk.159.1523473861445; Wed, 11 Apr 2018 12:11:01 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [10.221.171.167] (mobile-166-176-186-239.mycingular.net. [166.176.186.239]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id h2sm5157742pfd.119.2018.04.11.12.11.00 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Wed, 11 Apr 2018 12:11:00 -0700 (PDT)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (1.0)
From: Bernard Aboba <bernard.aboba@gmail.com>
X-Mailer: iPhone Mail (15E216)
In-Reply-To: <06252a76-f12e-4d8d-4a07-5240a7605bce@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 11 Apr 2018 12:10:59 -0700
Cc: RTCWeb IETF <rtcweb@ietf.org>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <6C355676-7C18-4F6F-970A-59010D6BCA0E@gmail.com>
References: <1D5B431C-801E-4F8C-8026-6BCBB72FF478@sn3rd.com> <63282b84-4493-3fcb-a95f-4afe17d96bb6@cs.tcd.ie> <CAOJ7v-1gTq+EEjb+-q-T-pABBW--rpNGegoj_d2_7f7AKGksCA@mail.gmail.com> <403713b4-31d4-9085-d639-d3f60935ed5a@cs.tcd.ie> <CAOJ7v-0ED-FK=JmSxBJYfM=PCdgY6kmbiq6aFLcP7OXugG07EA@mail.gmail.com> <e6938f7d-542d-736b-0a3d-9269d7dd06e5@cs.tcd.ie> <CAOW+2dv1ORz2tEkgDTvdM1DtgyOdgXqKU30T4QhLAp1NT+rirg@mail.gmail.com> <CAOJ7v-0tCcg3FdzyfSJ6Y3JaH-TivFf-Sey6+tD8BANJKsjqtQ@mail.gmail.com> <1fceb3c4-35f3-34f7-de1d-79d5805e6d22@gmail.com> <9517D601-D3E8-46E1-94E5-7EC29FD6319B@sn3rd.com> <b5d323ac-2205-2aee-05c9-f270e80215f5@gmail.com> <CAOJ7v-0+hr-NddbLCwgjkfyEFEzoLYW8BcE5OYZ+HUiqDRnarg@mail.gmail.com> <0dee004d-159a-a9be-a0b8-ecbfd4204d72@gmail.com> <06252a76-f12e-4d8d-4a07-5240a7605bce@gmail.com>
To: Lennart Grahl <lennart.grahl@gmail.com>
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/rtcweb/uNz_1da-u7MKGMReVV-m3RVuweU>
Subject: Re: [rtcweb] WGLC for draft-ietf-rtcweb-ip-handling
X-BeenThere: rtcweb@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
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: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/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, 11 Apr 2018 19:11:04 -0000

On Apr 11, 2018, at 11:15 AM, Lennart Grahl <lennart.grahl@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> Since I haven't seen a satisfactory response so far, let me rephrase
> this as a question: Can anyone explain to me why that approach is not
> considered a valid alternative to getUserMedia?

[BA] When considering alternative consent models you have to ask if the user will understand what they are being asked to consent to. For getUserMedia (or getDisplayMedia) it is relatively clear: access to a device or to the screen.  But for WebRTC or ORTC, what would you request permission for and when and how would you explain this to the user? Asking permission for object construction probably isn’t viable. So would you ask for permission to create a data channel? To apply a local or remote description? To create a certificate?  What if an application created multiple peer connections? How many prompts would be required for a 20 person conference?