Re: k= and draft-ietf-mmusic-rfc4566bis

Yes, we do not want people to use it. It was regarded as an 
inappropriate inadequately defined security mechanism when it existed.

But I agree with Colin in that straight removal is nor the answer. Among 
other things, we need to consider what we want to appear in the IANA 
lists in order to ensure that the name is not reused. Is that different 
from what appears now?

Keith

On 08-Sep-17 11:24 AM, Colin Perkins wrote:
> I don’t think we can remove it – we need to document it for legacy 
> reasons, if nothing else – but we can certainly strengthen the 
> warnings not to use it.
>
> Colin
>
>
>
>> On 8 Sep 2017, at 08:14, Ali C. Begen <[email protected] 
>> <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
>>
>> I have not seen it being used, but it could be just me who has not 
>> seen it. Will be happy to remove it, if everyone agrees.
>>
>> On Fri, Sep 8, 2017 at 2:26 AM, Cullen Jennings <[email protected] 
>> <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
>>
>>     Do we still need the "k=" line in SDP? Could we just remove all
>>     of section 5.12 ?
>>
>>
>>     _______________________________________________
>>     mmusic mailing list
>>     [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>
>>     https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mmusic
>>     <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mmusic>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> mmusic mailing list
>> [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>
>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mmusic
>
>
>
> -- 
> Colin Perkins
> https://csperkins.org/
>
>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> mmusic mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mmusic

_______________________________________________
mmusic mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mmusic