Justin Karneges wrote: > If we consider SRTP to be a "Jingle crypto layer" then we have to make our > definition more complex by defining compatible application types or > introducing new transport types. For example: ICE-UDP produces an unreliable > transport, Jingle SRTP consumes a reliable or unreliable transport and > produces an RTP transport, Jingle RTP consumes a reliable, unreliable, or RTP > transport. Mess. :) > > My proposal does the least rocking of the boat.
Agreed. The crypto layer should only add security and should not change the trasnport type. If you have a reliable transport and add crypto, the result should be a secure transport with the same characteristics as before. SRTP takes an unreliable transport but outputs something more. Dirk -- Please do not complain about the coffee. You'll be old and weak someday, too!
