Re: [rtcweb] Draft agenda for IETF 87

Hadriel Kaplan <hadriel.kaplan@oracle.com> Sat, 13 July 2013 00:00 UTC

Return-Path: <hadriel.kaplan@oracle.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 7DAEA11E8132 for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 12 Jul 2013 17:00:26 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -6.443
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.443 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.156, BAYES_00=-2.599, 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 CqRMBrgZ1xyD for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 12 Jul 2013 17:00:19 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from userp1040.oracle.com (userp1040.oracle.com [156.151.31.81]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id CCE8E11E812A for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Fri, 12 Jul 2013 17:00:19 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ucsinet21.oracle.com (ucsinet21.oracle.com [156.151.31.93]) by userp1040.oracle.com (Sentrion-MTA-4.3.1/Sentrion-MTA-4.3.1) with ESMTP id r6D00Hx8029388 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK); Sat, 13 Jul 2013 00:00:17 GMT
Received: from aserz7021.oracle.com (aserz7021.oracle.com [141.146.126.230]) by ucsinet21.oracle.com (8.14.4+Sun/8.14.4) with ESMTP id r6D00GxJ013360 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Sat, 13 Jul 2013 00:00:16 GMT
Received: from abhmt104.oracle.com (abhmt104.oracle.com [141.146.116.56]) by aserz7021.oracle.com (8.14.4+Sun/8.14.4) with ESMTP id r6D00GRP021342; Sat, 13 Jul 2013 00:00:16 GMT
Received: from [192.168.2.6] (/184.61.127.93) by default (Oracle Beehive Gateway v4.0) with ESMTP ; Fri, 12 Jul 2013 17:00:15 -0700
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 6.5 \(1508\))
From: Hadriel Kaplan <hadriel.kaplan@oracle.com>
In-Reply-To: <CABkgnnXOa44ZkZj-g6r7Qdk8dwm6m81yT4U=Q23-hE1Q7Hn22w@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 12 Jul 2013 20:00:13 -0400
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <F9556428-B6B8-407D-9D62-9A1CC04D4253@oracle.com>
References: <CA+9kkMBuCTdFsUMtmuBz6BnrSJMpHywEZU+x+m8ARnGprvzDzA@mail.gmail.com> <CABkgnnXOa44ZkZj-g6r7Qdk8dwm6m81yT4U=Q23-hE1Q7Hn22w@mail.gmail.com>
To: Martin Thomson <martin.thomson@gmail.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1508)
X-Source-IP: ucsinet21.oracle.com [156.151.31.93]
Cc: Cullen Jennings <fluffy@cisco.com>, "rtcweb@ietf.org" <rtcweb@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [rtcweb] Draft agenda for IETF 87
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: Sat, 13 Jul 2013 00:00:26 -0000

On Jul 11, 2013, at 2:08 PM, Martin Thomson <martin.thomson@gmail.com> wrote:

> I can see some implied outcomes for some of the items.  Would it help
> to list some (aspirational) goals.
> 
> On 11 July 2013 09:51, Ted Hardie <ted.ietf@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Should SDES be part of  WebRTC security practice and, if so, how?
>> Presentations: 30 minutes
>> Discussion:  40 minutes
> 
> Are the chairs confident that this topic can be resolved in this time?
> We managed to fritter a similar amount of time away without
> conclusion in the past.  I can see how you plan to accommodate
> overruns, but that just opens the possibility more time-wasting.  How
> do we ensure that this discussion actually concludes?

I can't guarantee that we'll conclude of course, but I'm hopeful we will get to a hum/vote one way or the other.  In my presentation I plan to propose a compromise, for example.  I think those against SDES will be ok with the compromise, but I'm not sure about those who want SDES.

-hadriel