Re: [rtcweb] CNAMEs and multiple peer connections

Martin Thomson <martin.thomson@gmail.com> Fri, 07 March 2014 07:01 UTC

Return-Path: <martin.thomson@gmail.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 74F691A01F3 for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 6 Mar 2014 23:01:50 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.999
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.999 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, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, 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 YT9_9N5iB4lK for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 6 Mar 2014 23:01:48 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-wg0-x22f.google.com (mail-wg0-x22f.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:400c:c00::22f]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0B9041A020A for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Thu, 6 Mar 2014 23:01:45 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-wg0-f47.google.com with SMTP id x12so4484359wgg.6 for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Thu, 06 Mar 2014 23:01:41 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type; bh=AxHSi3W84KHIoaSOBFJmiXPaxIzCQ/jAd5EZFtSu1FE=; b=NVii4e0LDz9ywt+bxKFGh+iCoEucqGk7pA4yyJbZX1d5Su7BFAMrM+/qNtue5sNo+4 poZinO76HNGKQhlVtsofVVhHt+wI8frUu/twQpgg7yJ4N3s4SXPp8rnsUMfit/QxDA1p 3U2JT47PxYTbDMiogDt3f9xlwcqSAUVuEzHc9zw2X8i4BIzYOtTjurbj+frSm3uLNhhU hY/WnY4ufKcVAT7XR8TlqFcUUJ2PyHtBnoblXmu2qst4sKdQ2X2uV8JNosGpcEWwf+D0 x13nh0WVLmBo6O/7q/GyH387tbVAfLe7555XH4m0UYv6SIsIZ6IpBRb0S39+UiblY+z8 svhg==
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.194.170.167 with SMTP id an7mr16419891wjc.39.1394175701446; Thu, 06 Mar 2014 23:01:41 -0800 (PST)
Received: by 10.227.10.196 with HTTP; Thu, 6 Mar 2014 23:01:41 -0800 (PST)
Received: by 10.227.10.196 with HTTP; Thu, 6 Mar 2014 23:01:41 -0800 (PST)
In-Reply-To: <53189785.60300@alvestrand.no>
References: <CABkgnnWGQ7GtKd33iF-RNbkeAyqKYshaPDDB=sAh5o-izKichQ@mail.gmail.com> <53189785.60300@alvestrand.no>
Date: Fri, 7 Mar 2014 07:01:41 +0000
Message-ID: <CABkgnnUk5oyqJ+VR8ccXUUWyVPL47R4PXEuhGNX6P6b=YFt=3g@mail.gmail.com>
From: Martin Thomson <martin.thomson@gmail.com>
To: Harald Alvestrand <harald@alvestrand.no>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=089e013c621c7075f804f3fed309
Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/rtcweb/yn8RjeINb4p376a1-dqEOriMUlo
Cc: 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: Fri, 07 Mar 2014 07:01:50 -0000

On Mar 6, 2014 3:43 PM, "Harald Alvestrand" <harald@alvestrand.no> wrote:
> This is the issue of whether one should (MUST/SHOULD/MAY/MUST NOT) use
> the same CNAME for RTP media streams created in different PeerConnections?

I think that, as Justin has pointed out, we should say 'MUST be different'.
That way, we are able to protect against linkability trivially.

The synchronization case I raised isn't important enough, or difficult
enough to address without CNAME that we would need to risk the greater
exposure that re-use would bring.