Re: actpass redux

Iñaki Baz Castillo <[email protected]>
Newsgroups gmane.ietf.mmusic
Message-ID <CALiegfka7-YatS0YGQEA_VmJDDQegr3ocb8kPLH=kLWyL6EZjA@mail.gmail.com>
2017-06-13 20:23 GMT+02:00 Christer Holmberg <[email protected]>:
> I don't necessarily disagree with you, and I don't know if your e-mail is off-topic for MMUSIC, but it for sure IS off-topic for THIS thread, and the draft/charter item discussed :)

Hi Christer,

Probably you are right, and sorry for that. Being honest, I started
writing a very different email exposing my experience with the issue
being discussed in the thread. It said something as follows:

I've seen the "SDP DTLS role conflict" in many implementations. AFAIR
older versions of Firefox and Asterisk wrote, in a re-offer, an
a=setup attribute with the effective value (active or passive) as
negotiated during the initial O/A, which breaks the RFC because it
MUST be "actpass", so Chrome complained. I've also seen (and reported)
that FreeSwitch changes its DTLS a=setup role during a re-negotiation,
but the funny thing here is that it was just a cosmetic change in the
SDP (internally FreeSwitch wants to keep the initially negotiated DTLS
connection regardless what it actually writes in the re-offer):

https://freeswitch.org/jira/si/jira.issueviews:issue-html/FS-10258/FS-10258.html

But after writing it, I've realized that if it's so complex for
existing implementations to deal with this specification rule (still
in 2017) changing the spec or creating a new one won't help much (at
least in the short term), so I got really frustrated and ended sending
my original text.

Regards.


-- 
Iñaki Baz Castillo
<[email protected]>

_______________________________________________
mmusic mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mmusic
lmpx.com only provides a reader for public news (NNTP) servers. It is not affiliated with the servers or forums shown here and is not responsible for the content of articles, which is written by their respective authors.