- From: David Dorwin <ddorwin@google.com>
- Date: Fri, 22 Jun 2012 15:33:10 -0700
- To: Mark Watson <watsonm@netflix.com>
- Cc: "<public-html-media@w3.org>" <public-html-media@w3.org>
- Message-ID: <CAHD2rsgehcR5gJ5=47N12m8_orytk3Pitw-4ex8UO6wU+Mf=vA@mail.gmail.com>
I corrected my last sentence below to: See https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=17470, which is tracking *when applications can call* other methods, specifically generateKeyRequest(). On Fri, Jun 22, 2012 at 3:30 PM, David Dorwin <ddorwin@google.com> wrote: > > > On Tue, Jun 19, 2012 at 8:52 AM, Mark Watson <watsonm@netflix.com> wrote: > >> >> On Jun 11, 2012, at 11:57 PM, David Dorwin wrote: >> >> https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=17199 >> >> The Key Release portion ( >> http://dvcs.w3.org/hg/html-media/raw-file/tip/encrypted-media/encrypted-media.html#key-release) >> of the proposal hasn't received a lot of feedback, so I'd like to start a >> discussion about it. >> >> Section 4.1 gives a good overview of the problem. Briefly, the goal is >> the provide the application with secure proof that a key is no longer >> present on the client ("released"). The application must also be able to >> ACK proofs. One particular thing to note is that proofs are not related >> to any particular media element. In addition, the current API proposal does >> not associate key release with HTMLMediaElement or any other object. >> >> Some possible topics for discussion: >> * Multiple KeyReleaseManagers could be created, but they would all >> represent the same data. How might we make KeyReleaseManager global or a >> singleton? >> >> >> I would like to better understand what is the "normal" way to do this ? >> Should this be window.mediakeyreleasemanager ? What are the issues with >> that ? >> >> * While not related to HTMLMediaElement from an API point of view, key >> release would need to be tightly integrated with the implementation >> underlying the rest of the proposal, which is related to HTMLMediaElement. >> - What is the impact on implementations? >> - How might we more closely associate key release >> with HTMLMediaElement and/or the rest of the EME implementation? >> >> >> If it makes a significant difference for implementations then this >> could be dealt with using methods on HTMLMediaElement, with the consequence >> that you might need to create a "dummy" HTMLMediaElement to get access to >> the proof of key release messages. >> > > I think this is worth investigating. One thing we will have to address is > ensuring that the media element implementation can be sufficiently > initialized in the "dummy" case. See > https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=17470, which is tracking > when applications can call other methods, specifically generateKeyRequest(). > >> >> * How might representing sessions as objects ( >> https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=16613) affect the design? >> >> >> I think it makes it clearer, since the "proof of key release" messages >> are created (and stored in the CDM) exactly when a "session" is destroyed. >> In fact they become "proof of session destruction" instead. >> >> …Mark >> >> >
Received on Friday, 22 June 2012 22:33:59 UTC