Re: [Wish] WG Last Call for draft-ietf-wish-whip

Juliusz Chroboczek <jch@irif.fr> Sun, 29 January 2023 15:11 UTC

Return-Path: <jch@irif.fr>
X-Original-To: wish@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: wish@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7CAFFC15154C for <wish@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 29 Jan 2023 07:11:21 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.097
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.097 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, RCVD_IN_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_DBL_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, URIBL_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=irif.fr
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([50.223.129.194]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id sSXN9wYaDyUz for <wish@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 29 Jan 2023 07:11:17 -0800 (PST)
Received: from korolev.univ-paris7.fr (korolev.univ-paris7.fr [IPv6:2001:660:3301:8000::1:2]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D63D7C14EB18 for <wish@ietf.org>; Sun, 29 Jan 2023 07:11:15 -0800 (PST)
Received: from potemkin.univ-paris7.fr (potemkin.univ-paris7.fr [IPv6:2001:660:3301:8000::1:1]) by korolev.univ-paris7.fr (8.14.4/8.14.4/relay1/82085) with ESMTP id 30TFBC4d023218 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NO); Sun, 29 Jan 2023 16:11:12 +0100
Received: from mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr (mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr [81.194.30.253]) by potemkin.univ-paris7.fr (8.14.4/8.14.4/relay2/82085) with ESMTP id 30TFBCoM009883; Sun, 29 Jan 2023 16:11:12 +0100
Received: from mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id 12216F1DBA; Sun, 29 Jan 2023 16:11:11 +0100 (CET)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=irif.fr; h= content-type:content-type:mime-version:user-agent:references :in-reply-to:subject:subject:from:from:message-id:date:date :received:received; s=dkim-irif; t=1675005070; x=1675869071; bh= KIQP873D8ofYHirjMKeNPKuveLMkrUaFfGHENYqT5TQ=; b=nIXDMMC9tKpV+Miw 8KrHtx9N4TrU2HidiLh1NfF4sLZDN2fXahbtU1GihupZ8TKqDOOm60gYScFJsCcZ cHW2curSZHFvgpZ7uom+eU8sREfbES08Bt1dXYV7MUDLH2O2ydDBgz09tUTaMCXY vMFxEUPO4LdhVm9d5MAQnw55dFyvUlmYpSNnyVm00t34eEj9oB3xnP4ehc4lUrSg GX47y2sdI2bDENYyK4TNZrb+d1WRcu+jTEI2QzfsQzKeVk0cf63GiGea1bXyFVSp Mil0xeMSvSe5VHVKs4ooTEgPP2eC0w6xpGmvv5Wl4abuj2buR8dSlPLWXeRFl5PN +Z4TYA==
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at math.univ-paris-diderot.fr
Received: from mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr ([127.0.0.1]) by mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr (mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10023) with ESMTP id 2ZU59w5IBrv7; Sun, 29 Jan 2023 16:11:10 +0100 (CET)
Received: from pirx.irif.fr (unknown [78.194.40.74]) (Authenticated sender: jch) by mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 3B433F1DB7; Sun, 29 Jan 2023 16:11:09 +0100 (CET)
Date: Sun, 29 Jan 2023 16:11:09 +0100
Message-ID: <87bkmh2x6a.wl-jch@irif.fr>
From: Juliusz Chroboczek <jch@irif.fr>
To: Sean Turner <sean@sn3rd.com>
Cc: WISH List <wish@ietf.org>
In-Reply-To: <5372AA95-F2A7-4E98-8FBA-92CD18D6A9C0@sn3rd.com>
References: <5372AA95-F2A7-4E98-8FBA-92CD18D6A9C0@sn3rd.com>
User-Agent: Wanderlust/2.15.9 (Almost Unreal) Emacs/28.2 Mule/6.0
MIME-Version: 1.0 (generated by SEMI-EPG 1.14.7 - "Harue")
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
X-Greylist: Sender IP whitelisted, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.2.7 (korolev.univ-paris7.fr [IPv6:2001:660:3301:8000::1:2]); Sun, 29 Jan 2023 16:11:12 +0100 (CET)
X-Greylist: Sender IP whitelisted, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.2.7 (potemkin.univ-paris7.fr [194.254.61.141]); Sun, 29 Jan 2023 16:11:12 +0100 (CET)
X-Miltered: at korolev with ID 63D68C90.001 by Joe's j-chkmail (http : // j-chkmail dot ensmp dot fr)!
X-Miltered: at potemkin with ID 63D68C90.000 by Joe's j-chkmail (http : // j-chkmail dot ensmp dot fr)!
X-j-chkmail-Enveloppe: 63D68C90.001 from potemkin.univ-paris7.fr/potemkin.univ-paris7.fr/null/potemkin.univ-paris7.fr/<jch@irif.fr>
X-j-chkmail-Enveloppe: 63D68C90.000 from mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr/mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr/null/mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr/<jch@irif.fr>
X-j-chkmail-Score: MSGID : 63D68C90.001 on korolev.univ-paris7.fr : j-chkmail score : . : R=. U=. O=. B=0.000 -> S=0.000
X-j-chkmail-Score: MSGID : 63D68C90.000 on potemkin.univ-paris7.fr : j-chkmail score : . : R=. U=. O=. B=0.000 -> S=0.000
X-j-chkmail-Status: Ham
X-j-chkmail-Status: Ham
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/wish/JcoZiqiSAUoxkI_qv2ju0o3kAfo>
Subject: Re: [Wish] WG Last Call for draft-ietf-wish-whip
X-BeenThere: wish@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.39
Precedence: list
List-Id: WebRTC Ingest Signaling over HTTPS <wish.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/wish>, <mailto:wish-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/wish/>
List-Post: <mailto:wish@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:wish-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/wish>, <mailto:wish-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 29 Jan 2023 15:11:21 -0000

> Please review the I-D

I have implemented a previous version of this draft, and I have carefully
read the latest revision.  I strongly support the publication of the WHIP
protocol as a standards track document.

I have two minor issues with the current document.  I have reported these
issues previously, but I do not understand the answers that I have been given.
Since I believe that they are of a nature to prevent interoperability,
I think it is important that they should be mentioned during last call.


1. No reliable way to discover ICE servers

ICE servers are communicated to the client in the answer to the initial
offer.  I must be missing something, but I believe that by the time the
offer has been sent, it is too late to update the PeerConnection's
configuration: for example, if the client uses the W3C WebRTC API, any
call to pc.setConfiguration will have no effect after ICE gathering has
started.

A workaround would be to request the list of ICE servers before generating
the initial offer, but support for doing that is NOT RECOMMENDED (Section 4.4
of the draft).

Thus, unless I'm missing something, the current draft provides no reliable
way to communicate a list of ICE servers to the client.


2. No way to discover whether Trickle ICE is available

Trickle ICE is optional in the client->server direction.  However, the
document does not specify what the client is to do if it sends an initial
offer with only host candidates, and later gathers additional candidates
only to discover that the server does not support Trickle ICE.

More precisely, the draft does not specify how a client should behave
after the following exchange:

  C: POST /endpoint
  S: 201 Created (Location: /resource)
  C: PATCH /resource
  S: 405 Not Implemented
  C: ???


Sorry for mentioning these issues again, but I believe that they are of
a nature to impede interoperability, and should be considered for
a standards track document.

-- Juliusz Chroboczek