On Nov 13, 2007 11:50 AM, Francois Audet <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > (copying Flemming) > > Good draft. Very helpful. > > On the SDP side of things. > > I didn't seen anything in the SDP format that specifically indicated in the > offer that > you are trying to setup DTLS-SRTP. > This is signaled in the SDP with the token "UDP/TLS/RTP/SAVP". See http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-fischl-mmusic-sdp-dtls-04.txt for more details.
> Is the assumption that if there is no indication besides the RTP/SAVP in the > tcap, that > DTLS-SRTP may be negotiated, and that therefore we do not need an explicit > indication > that DTLS-SRTP is supported? > More specifically, UDP/TLS/RTP/SAVP. to signal we're sending SRTP over DTLS. > Do we think it's good enough? In other words, is RTP/SAVP without a=crypto or > a=key-mgmt > good enough to indicate DTLS-SRTP? Or should we have another attribute? > I think this is good enough. > A side comment is that the example shows usage with Best-Effort SRTP. My take > is > that it could also be used in "DTLS-SRTP-always" mode by having the m-line > use UDP/TLS/RTP/AVP instead of RTP/AVP and not using a a=tcap/a=pcfg line. It > would probably be worthwile to describe it in the draft. > I can add an example fragment to cover this case. _______________________________________________ Sip mailing list https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sip This list is for NEW development of the core SIP Protocol Use [EMAIL PROTECTED] for questions on current sip Use [EMAIL PROTECTED] for new developments on the application of sip
