Re: New Liaison Statement, "W3C WEBRTC WG to IETF MMUSIC WG"
Cullen Jennings <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.ietf.mmusic |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
Just read this now and a few points ... 1) I don't think this answer the questions asked. 2) the a and b miss the discussion of the context where this happens where things like a 2nd DTLS connection replacing a prior DTLS connection but on the same flow. I'm focused on getting JSEP completed right now so don't plan to spend time on this till somewhat later. > On Apr 21, 2017, at 6:44 AM, Flemming Andreasen <[email protected]> wrote: > > Greetings MMUSIC. > > The issue raised below has been discussed on the MMUSIC mailing (see thread starting at https://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/mmusic/current/msg17646.html) and the recent MMUSIC meeting at IETF 98 (Chicago). A summary discussion has been provided at https://github.com/w3c/webrtc-pc/pull/1026#issuecomment-291194679 as well. > > Based on the above, we suggest to answer the liaison statement as follows: > > <quote> > Thank you for raising the question regarding playout of unverified media to the MMUSIC WG. We have looked further into the issue raised and we would like to request a clarification of the exact sequence of events that WEBRTC believes can lead to this. In particular, we ask you to please show either > (a) how ICE can complete prior to DTLS fingerprint exchange, or > (b) how media can be received prior to ICE completing > > It is currently unclear to us how either of these situations can arise in which case we do not believe the issue raised would apply to WebRTC. > > For further background information, please refer to: > - https://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/mmusic/current/msg17646.html > - https://github.com/w3c/webrtc-pc/pull/1026#issuecomment-291194679 > </quote> > > Please let the chairs know (before April 28) if you have any comments. > > Thanks > > -- Flemming > > > > On 4/3/17 11:30 AM, Liaison Statement Management Tool wrote: >> Title: W3C WEBRTC WG to IETF MMUSIC WG >> Submission Date: 2017-04-03 >> URL of the IETF Web page: https://datatracker.ietf.org/liaison/1511/ >> Please reply by 2017-04-16 >> From: Bernard Aboba <[email protected]> >> To: Flemming Andreasen <[email protected]>,Bo Burman <[email protected]> >> Cc: Adam Roach <[email protected]>,Flemming Andreasen <[email protected]>,Ben Campbell <[email protected]>,Bo Burman <[email protected]>,Alexey Melnikov <[email protected]>,Multiparty Multimedia Session Control Discussion List <[email protected]> >> Response Contacts: [email protected], [email protected], [email protected] >> Technical Contacts: >> Purpose: For action >> >> Body: Colleagues: >> >> In the W3C WEBRTC WG, an issue has been submitted relating to playout of unverified media: >> https://github.com/w3c/webrtc-pc/issues/849 >> >> It has been suggested that if the browser is configured to do so, that playout be allowed for a limited period >> (e.g. 5 seconds) prior to fingerprint verification: >> https://github.com/w3c/webrtc-pc/pull/1026 >> >> Section 6.2 of draft-ietf-mmusic-4572-update-13 contains the following text, carried over from RFC 4572: >> >> Note that when the offer/answer model is being used, it is possible >> for a media connection to outrace the answer back to the offerer. >> Thus, if the offerer has offered a 'setup:passive' or 'setup:actpass' >> role, it MUST (as specified in RFC 4145 [7]) begin listening for an >> incoming connection as soon as it sends its offer. However, it MUST >> NOT assume that the data transmitted over the TLS connection is valid >> until it has received a matching fingerprint in an SDP answer. If >> the fingerprint, once it arrives, does not match the client's >> certificate, the server endpoint MUST terminate the media connection >> with a bad_certificate error, as stated in the previous paragraph. >> >> Given the outstanding issue relating to handling of unverified media, the Chairs of the W3C WEBRTC WG >> would like to request clarification from the IETF MMUSIC WG as to the meaning of the "MUST NOT" in the >> above paragraph. In particular, what is it permitted for a WebRTC implementation to do with received data prior >> to verification? For example: >> >> 1. May data received over the data channel be provided to the web application prior to verification? >> 2. May received media be played out prior to verification? >> Attachments: >> >> webrtc-liason-to-mmusic copy.pdf >> https://www.ietf.org/lib/dt/documents/LIAISON/liaison-2017-04-03-w3c-webrtc-mmusic-w3c-webrtc-wg-to-ietf-mmusic-wg-attachment-1.pdf >> >> . >> > > _______________________________________________ > mmusic mailing list > [email protected] > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mmusic