Re: [secdir] [payload] sec-dir review of draft-ietf-payload-rtp-opus-08

Stephen Farrell <stephen.farrell@cs.tcd.ie> Tue, 07 April 2015 16:12 UTC

Return-Path: <stephen.farrell@cs.tcd.ie>
X-Original-To: secdir@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: secdir@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8DE2A1B3750; Tue, 7 Apr 2015 09:12:32 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -4.21
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.21 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01] 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 UiKBtt-ibzqo; Tue, 7 Apr 2015 09:12:31 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mercury.scss.tcd.ie (mercury.scss.tcd.ie [134.226.56.6]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 606E11A8A0B; Tue, 7 Apr 2015 09:12:31 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mercury.scss.tcd.ie (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2A3A6BE64; Tue, 7 Apr 2015 17:12:30 +0100 (IST)
Received: from mercury.scss.tcd.ie ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (mercury.scss.tcd.ie [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id QVWx5PNL7Ljv; Tue, 7 Apr 2015 17:12:30 +0100 (IST)
Received: from [134.226.36.180] (stephen-think.dsg.cs.tcd.ie [134.226.36.180]) by mercury.scss.tcd.ie (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id F2AE3BE51; Tue, 7 Apr 2015 17:12:29 +0100 (IST)
Message-ID: <552401ED.6060106@cs.tcd.ie>
Date: Tue, 07 Apr 2015 17:12:29 +0100
From: Stephen Farrell <stephen.farrell@cs.tcd.ie>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.6.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Ben Campbell <ben@nostrum.com>
References: <sjmoaosz53h.fsf@securerf.ihtfp.org> <54E3A32F.2010008@jmvalin.ca> <760B7D45D1EFF74988DBF5C2122830C24D064CDE@szxpml507-mbx.exmail.huawei.com> <sjmk2zdzv6g.fsf@securerf.ihtfp.org> <916F29B3-E392-481B-A269-FBA58DFEF14D@nostrum.com> <551C612B.4030702@mozilla.com> <C3DD8EE5-B066-4C06-99F4-B9147A128811@nostrum.com> <C17AE3D5-F62D-42A3-9F1F-885BF1B984EB@nostrum.com> <551EFB9C.4040504@xiph.org> <sjmy4m5grwp.fsf@securerf.ihtfp.org> <269A06E2-6704-4E5E-BBFD-92F157639261@nostrum.com> <5522D40E.8040402@nostrum.com> <5523FEEB.60000@cs.tcd.ie> <A68522D3-3B66-4D35-AACD-CF2D6DE5DE36@nostrum.com>
In-Reply-To: <A68522D3-3B66-4D35-AACD-CF2D6DE5DE36@nostrum.com>
OpenPGP: id=D66EA7906F0B897FB2E97D582F3C8736805F8DA2; url=
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/secdir/Cho6AX8nIux3j8RXYN6WBhKMJmo>
Cc: "secdir@ietf.org" <secdir@ietf.org>, payload@ietf.org, "jspittka@gmail.com" <jspittka@gmail.com>, "iesg@ietf.org" <iesg@ietf.org>, "payload-chairs@tools.ietf.org" <payload-chairs@tools.ietf.org>, "koenvos74@gmail.com" <koenvos74@gmail.com>, Robert Sparks <rjsparks@nostrum.com>
Subject: Re: [secdir] [payload] sec-dir review of draft-ietf-payload-rtp-opus-08
X-BeenThere: secdir@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: Security Area Directorate <secdir.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/secdir>, <mailto:secdir-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/secdir/>
List-Post: <mailto:secdir@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:secdir-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/secdir>, <mailto:secdir-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 07 Apr 2015 16:12:32 -0000

Thanks Ben,

On 07/04/15 17:08, Ben Campbell wrote:
>>
>> Who knows the status of that work?
> 
> I am trying to track that down. But I am working under the assumption it
> didn't go anywhere.
> 
> But I'd rather try to revive that work than to take a piecemeal approach
> of adding it to payload drafts. That doesn't help with pre-existing
> payload formats, and I think asking RTP application designers to treat
> privacy requirements on a per-codec basis is untenable. I suspect the
> best we could expect out of that is for people to ignore us.
> 
> If we can agree to leave this out of payload drafts, I will track down
> and try really hard to restart the RTP level effort.

Yes, that'd definitely be the best approach. I do get how it's
not so easy to motivate someone to get it done though, but maybe
another push at it will work. I'm happy to help as I can as well
too.

Cheers,
S.