Thanks
On Thu, Aug 1, 2013 at 4:51 AM, Eric Rescorla <[email protected]> wrote: > On Wed, Jul 31, 2013 at 11:40 PM, pablo platt <[email protected]>wrote: > >> Do I need to follow DTLS 1.0 (rfc4346) or DTLS 1.2 (rfc6347)? >> > > Firefox and Chrome both do DTLS 1.0, though they'll probably do 1.2 > soonish. > > > >> Am I supposed to send the following ClientHello request from the MCU to >> Firefox inside Handshake request? >> What should I use for session_id, cipher_suites and compression_methods? >> > > I would advise using an existing DTLS implementation such as the > ones in OpenSSL or NSS. > > -Ekr > > >> struct { >> ProtocolVersion client_version; >> Random random; >> SessionID session_id; >> opaque cookie<0..2^8-1>; // New field >> CipherSuite cipher_suites<2..2^16-1>; >> CompressionMethod compression_methods<1..2^8-1>; >> } ClientHello; >> >> struct { >> HandshakeType msg_type; >> uint24 length; >> uint16 message_seq; // New field >> uint24 fragment_offset; // New field >> uint24 fragment_length; // New field >> HelloRequest; >> } Handshake; >> >> On Wed, Jul 31, 2013 at 7:28 PM, Eric Rescorla <[email protected]> wrote: >> >>> >>> >>> >>> On Wed, Jul 31, 2013 at 4:57 PM, pablo platt <[email protected]>wrote: >>> >>>> I tried using ice-lite and I'm getting four stun connectivity checks >>>> which >>>> I reply to and than I'm not getting any more packets. >>>> In my test Firefox is the offerer. >>>> When using an MCU, is it better that Firefox will send the offer or the >>>> MCU? >>>> >>>> Currently, the peer that sends the offer is also the DTLS server? >>>> Does that means that after the ICE connectivity checks Firefox waits >>>> for a >>>> DTLS handshake on the selected IP/Port? >>> >>> >>> Yes. >>> >>>> >>>> >>>> On Wed, Jul 31, 2013 at 1:37 PM, Adam Roach <[email protected]> wrote: >>>> >>>> > On 7/31/13 11:33, [email protected] wrote: >>>> > >>>> > Does Firefox support ice-lite? >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > I would Firefox to interwork with an ice-lite implementation just >>>> fine. If >>>> > you find any issues with doing so, please let us know. >>>> > >>>> > Is there a reason not to use ice-lite when building MCU? >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > Using ICE Lite in an MCU is probably okay in the majority of >>>> deployment >>>> > scenarios, since they will generally be deployed in non-NATed, >>>> > non-firewalled configuration. Do be aware, however, that implementing >>>> your >>>> > MCU with ice-lite does impose on it the limitation that it will work >>>> only >>>> > in those kinds of deployments. >>>> > >>>> > -- >>>> > Adam Roach >>>> > Principal Platform Engineer >>>> > [email protected] >>>> > +1 650 903 0800 x863 >>>> > >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> dev-media mailing list >>>> [email protected] >>>> https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-media >>>> >>> >>> >> > _______________________________________________ dev-media mailing list [email protected] https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-media
