Re: [rtcweb] Where to specify ICE usage and the common transport

Magnus Westerlund <magnus.westerlund@ericsson.com> Thu, 12 July 2012 10:01 UTC

Return-Path: <magnus.westerlund@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 B737921F87CF for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 12 Jul 2012 03:01:53 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -106.198
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-106.198 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.051, BAYES_00=-2.599, HELO_EQ_SE=0.35, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
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 rmgzpNUi+3Za for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 12 Jul 2012 03:01:52 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mailgw2.ericsson.se (mailgw2.ericsson.se [193.180.251.37]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 30EA721F87CB for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Thu, 12 Jul 2012 03:01:51 -0700 (PDT)
X-AuditID: c1b4fb25-b7fb66d000003bb6-69-4ffea0af6797
Received: from esessmw0197.eemea.ericsson.se (Unknown_Domain [153.88.253.125]) by mailgw2.ericsson.se (Symantec Mail Security) with SMTP id 1B.F5.15286.FA0AEFF4; Thu, 12 Jul 2012 12:02:23 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from [127.0.0.1] (153.88.115.8) by esessmw0197.eemea.ericsson.se (153.88.115.88) with Microsoft SMTP Server id 8.3.264.0; Thu, 12 Jul 2012 12:02:22 +0200
Message-ID: <4FFEA0AD.2070906@ericsson.com>
Date: Thu, 12 Jul 2012 12:02:21 +0200
From: Magnus Westerlund <magnus.westerlund@ericsson.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; rv:13.0) Gecko/20120614 Thunderbird/13.0.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Cullen Jennings <fluffy@iii.ca>
References: <E721D8C6A2E1544DB2DEBC313AF54DE20129FC7B@xmb-rcd-x02.cisco.com> <CC1C7546.2BA3A%rmohanr@cisco.com> <9254B5E6361B1648AFC00BA447E6E8C32AEB70A0@szxeml545-mbx.china.huawei.com> <4FF693EE.8030905@ericsson.com> <4DACB02C-1828-40E9-9500-2D528B0E2BFB@iii.ca>
In-Reply-To: <4DACB02C-1828-40E9-9500-2D528B0E2BFB@iii.ca>
X-Enigmail-Version: 1.4.2
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Brightmail-Tracker: H4sIAAAAAAAAA+NgFlrCLMWRmVeSWpSXmKPExsUyM+Jvre76Bf/8Ddb9E7d48vgHu8WH9T8Y Ldb+a2d3YPZoOfKW1WPJkp9MHpfPf2QMYI7isklJzcksSy3St0vgynjR0sFWsJy34t+7V2wN jA+5uhg5OCQETCR6eiK6GDmBTDGJC/fWs3UxcnEICZxilHi/cDYLhLOcUWL7/1+MIFW8AtoS C+edZAOxWQRUJRoXHwWLswlYSNz80QgWFxUIlpg2/R47RL2gxMmZT1hAbBEBZYlzO+4ygyxm FgiSOLjMt4uRnUNYwEvivRfEpnYmiecvToB1cgpYSXxef4AV4jZJiXvtq8GmMwvoSUy52sII YctLNG+dzQxiCwFd1tDUwTqBUWgWksWzkLTMQtKygJF5FaNwbmJmTnq5kV5qUWZycXF+nl5x 6iZGYEgf3PJbdQfjnXMihxilOViUxHmtt+7xFxJITyxJzU5NLUgtii8qzUktPsTIxMEp1cAo te/Mld2XE9P2Ofb8+JRcVRu9fhq/wrFMhf5VB179PCd1d0rle+duGWnpRdu3vDzDxGS96dSn kmRO/kNsDbcta5wLtu1TPnA5szupbd6SWT8b7iqLvl5y3jxn098pc0qKXxhV3o2WneFhfDPg e2jjz/77u+sEM5g7fnJbLTYJUFzv5jC/ovGcEktxRqKhFnNRcSIAXIxUkTcCAAA=
Cc: "rtcweb@ietf.org" <rtcweb@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [rtcweb] Where to specify ICE usage and the common transport
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: Thu, 12 Jul 2012 10:01:54 -0000

On 2012-07-12 06:31, Cullen Jennings wrote:
> 
> On Jul 6, 2012, at 24:29 , Magnus Westerlund wrote:
> 
>> The last part points to that we have 2 or 3 (depending on how you
>> see DTLS-SRTP) users of the datagram transport flow. As co-author
>> of one of those documents I would like to have a single point to
>> reference.
> 
> Why does your document need a reference to something that says if we
> have a UDP over HTTP mechanism or not? I'm worried that we are
> creating some ugly interdependencies in the layering that are not
> needed.

I want to have something to reference that defines the datagram
transport the RTP uses. Independently if the actual datagrams are direct
ICE establish path or over any variety or combination of relays over
HTTP or not.

I personally think we do need something that sufficiently describing and
normatively specifying the datagram transport that both RTP and
DTLS/SCTP uses. This is after all usage of ICE, likely variant. The
requirement to support STUN and some TURN version. The requirement to
handle a varaint of the demultiplexing that DTLS-SRTP discusses due to
the simultanous occurrance of STUN, RTP and DTLS packets at the same
level in the stack.

Cheers

Magnus Westerlund

----------------------------------------------------------------------
Multimedia Technologies, Ericsson Research EAB/TVM
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Ericsson AB                | Phone  +46 10 7148287
Färögatan 6                | Mobile +46 73 0949079
SE-164 80 Stockholm, Sweden| mailto: magnus.westerlund@ericsson.com
----------------------------------------------------------------------