W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-webrtc@w3.org > July 2011

Re: [minutes] WebRTC F2F meeting Quebec City - 23 July 2011

From: Randell Jesup <randell-ietf@jesup.org>
Date: Mon, 25 Jul 2011 04:35:55 -0400
Message-ID: <4E2D2AEB.8070103@jesup.org>
To: public-webrtc@w3.org
On 7/24/2011 5:12 PM, Francois Daoust wrote:
>
>    Matthew_Koffman: I think legacy interoperability is missing from
>    your slides.
>
>    ??2: what do you mean with legacy interoperability
>
>    Matthew_Koffman: I can show you existing devices that do RTP but not
>    SRTP. If you want to non secure devices, you need to relax the
>    bullet presented that unencrypted data do no need to be carried.
>
>    hta: one of the things that someone mentioned is that we need to
>    talk to gateways.
>

Right - a call to a PSTN gateway (or various other gateways, or to a 
hardware
videophone, or a SIP softclient, or a SIP PBX, etc) may not support SRTP.

The alternatives are:

1) use a media gateway to access all non-rtcweb resources

      Since we can't assume a non-rtcweb device will support SRTP, any 
connections
      made to a non-rtcweb endpoint would need to go to a 
"strip-SRTP-and-forward"
      media gateway, removing any chance of the rtcweb device talking 
directly (for media)
      to the non-rtcweb resource.

2) allow non-SRTP connections, at least when the destination is a 
non-rtcweb device,
      and inform the application that the streams are unencrypted.  Note 
that in 1) they're
      unencrypted (elsewhere), but the app may not be informed of this, 
making it hard to
      inform the user.   We could still require SRTP for 
rtcweb-to-rtcweb connections.

3) ? any other ideas?

-- 
Randell Jesup
randell-ietf@jesup.org
Received on Monday, 25 July 2011 08:37:32 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 25 July 2011 08:37:33 GMT