ietf
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [AVTCORE] Last Call: <draft-ietf-avt-srtp-not-mandatory-14.txt> (Securing the RTP Protocol Framework: Why RTP Does Not Mandate a Single Media Security Solution) to Informational RFC

2013-12-05 10:57:07

Given the hum in the IETF plenary at the last IETF, I no longer think this 
document represents IETF consensus. Given the hum in RTCWeb working group, I 
doubt this represents the consensus of the RAI area either. 

I think I would be tempted to resolve this by saying for each different 
scenario RTP is used in (SIP, RTSP, Mulitcast etc) exactly how it needs to be 
secured and for scenarios not listed such as new usages, what the requirements 
are. For something like SIP, having just one way to secure RTP is much better 
than having many ways. 



On Nov 22, 2013, at 3:07 PM, The IESG <iesg-secretary(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org> 
wrote:


The IESG has received a request from the Audio/Video Transport Core
Maintenance WG (avtcore) to consider the following document:
- 'Securing the RTP Protocol Framework: Why RTP Does Not Mandate a Single
  Media Security Solution'
 <draft-ietf-avt-srtp-not-mandatory-14.txt> as Informational RFC

The IESG plans to make a decision in the next few weeks, and solicits
final comments on this action. Please send substantive comments to the
ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org mailing lists by 2013-12-06. Exceptionally, comments 
may be
sent to iesg(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org instead. In either case, please retain the
beginning of the Subject line to allow automated sorting.

Abstract


  This memo discusses the problem of securing real-time multimedia
  sessions, and explains why the Real-time Transport Protocol (RTP),
  and the associated RTP Control Protocol (RTCP), do not mandate a
  single media security mechanism.  Guidelines for designers and
  reviewers of future RTP extensions are provided, to ensure that
  appropriate security mechanisms are mandated, and that any such
  mechanisms are specified in a manner that conforms with the RTP
  architecture.




The file can be obtained via
http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-avt-srtp-not-mandatory/

IESG discussion can be tracked via
http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-avt-srtp-not-mandatory/ballot/


No IPR declarations have been submitted directly on this I-D.


_______________________________________________
Audio/Video Transport Core Maintenance
avt(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/avt


<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>