Subject: [Perc] Signaling the SDP dtls-id in DTLS

From: "Paul E. Jones" <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 13 Mar 2017 18:24:36 +0000

PERC WG,

We submitted the the draft referenced below for consideration in PERC 
during this IETF meeting.

Paul

------ Forwarded Message ------
From: [email-masked]
To: [email-masked]
Sent: 3/13/2017 2:21:56 PM
Subject: I-D Action: draft-jones-perc-dtls-id-00.txt

A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts 
directories.

         Title           : Transporting the SDP attribute 'dtls-id' in 
TLS and DTLS
         Authors         : Paul E. Jones
                           Nils H. Ohlmeier
  Filename        : draft-jones-perc-dtls-id-00.txt
  Pages           : 6
  Date            : 2017-03-13

Abstract:
    This draft defines a new extension to carry the "dtls-id" value
    defined for use in the Session Description Protocol within TLS and
    DTLS.

The IETF datatracker status page for this draft is:
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-jones-perc-dtls-id/

There's also a htmlized version available at:
https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-jones-perc-dtls-id-00

Please note that it may take a couple of minutes from the time of 
submission
until the htmlized version and diff are available at tools.ietf.org.

Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP at:
ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/

_______________________________________________
I-D-Announce mailing list
[email-masked]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/i-d-announce
Internet-Draft directories: http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html
or ftp://ftp.ietf.org/ietf/1shadow-sites.txt

---

From: Martin Thomson <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 14 Mar 2017 08:54:40 +1100

Note that this overlaps with the draft I shared in avtcore last meeting:
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-thomson-avtcore-sdp-uks/

The mechanism in Paul's (and Nils') draft is a strict subset of what
is in the other draft.  It's identical now because Paul and I have
been talking.  We just don't know how to proceed, because avtcore
consider the security aspects of the UKS work outside of their
remit/expertise (or something like that, I can't remember the details
of the discussion from last meeting).

If this working group is open to taking on a slightly larger scope of
work than what Paul's draft covers, then it might be prudent to
discuss strategy at the meeting.

On 14 March 2017 at 05:24, Paul E. Jones <[email-masked]> wrote:
> PERC WG,
>
> We submitted the the draft referenced below for consideration in PERC during
> this IETF meeting.
>
> Paul
>
>         Title           : Transporting the SDP attribute 'dtls-id' in TLS
> and DTLS
>         Authors         : Paul E. Jones
>                           Nils H. Ohlmeier
> Please note that it may take a couple of minutes from the time of submission
> Perc mailing list
> [email-masked]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/perc

---

From: Jonathan Lennox <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 13 Mar 2017 22:21:16 +0000

> On Mar 13, 2017, at 5:54 PM, Martin Thomson <[email-masked]> wrote:
> 

I think the discussion — or at least my part of the discussion — was that the UKS problem can occur for TLS, and for DTLS/SCTP, not just for DTLS/SRTP; it’s inherent to the fingerprint mechanism and SDP. Thus it seemed to me that it was more in MMUSIC’s remit than in AVTCORE’s.  (I don’t think PERC is right.)

---

From: Martin Thomson <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 14 Mar 2017 10:20:45 +1100

> I think the discussion — or at least my part of the discussion — was that the UKS problem can occur for TLS, and for DTLS/SCTP, not just for DTLS/SRTP; it’s inherent to the fingerprint mechanism an…

Hmm, and that reminds me why a=dtls-id isn't going to cut it here.
Unless we expand it to include other uses of TLS.  I'll go lobby
mmusic.

---

From: "Paul E. Jones" <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 14 Mar 2017 03:33:47 +0000

Martin,

I have no particular desire to see dtls-id in DTLS standardized in PERC, 
though I did want to have a discussion to see if we can take this 
approach to solve one of the open issues with the PERC tunnel spec.  If 
there is agreement on the approach, let's definitely figure out how to 
get it done.

The procedural bits in the draft Nils and I submitted should be 
integrated into other PERC documents (e.g., tunnel and some other 
document for the endpoint procedures).  We did not intend for that draft 
to continue going forward, but just to serve as a starting point for 
discussion on this approach.

Paul

------ Original Message ------
From: "Martin Thomson" <[email-masked]>
To: "Paul E. Jones" <[email-masked]>
Cc: "[email-masked]" <[email-masked]>
Sent: 3/13/2017 5:54:40 PM
Subject: Re: [Perc] Signaling the SDP dtls-id in DTLS

>>during
>>TLS