Subject: [AVT] I-D Action:draft-ietf-avt-dtls-srtp-03.txt

From: [email-masked]
Date: Mon, 14 Jul 2008 09:30:02 -0700 (PDT)

A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts directories.
This draft is a work item of the Audio/Video Transport Working Group of the IETF.

	Title           : Datagram Transport Layer Security (DTLS) Extension to Establish Keys for Secure Real-time Transport Protocol (SRTP)
	Author(s)       : D. McGrew, E. Rescorla
	Filename        : draft-ietf-avt-dtls-srtp-03.txt
	Pages           : 25
	Date            : 2008-07-14

This document describes a Datagram Transport Layer Security (DTLS)
extension to establish keys for secure RTP (SRTP) and secure RTP
Control Protocol (SRTCP) flows.  DTLS keying happens on the media
path, independent of any out-of-band signalling channel present.

A URL for this Internet-Draft is:
http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-avt-dtls-srtp-03.txt

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

Below is the data which will enable a MIME compliant mail reader
implementation to automatically retrieve the ASCII version of the
Internet-Draft.
_______________________________________________
Audio/Video Transport Working Group
[email-masked]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/avt

---

From: Colin Perkins <[email-masked]>
Date: Sat, 26 Jul 2008 10:18:49 +0100

> A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts  
...
> http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-avt-dtls-srtp-03.txt

This generally looks good, and ready for WG last call. I just found  
some minor nits:

End of section 3, be careful with terminology, since an SSRC  
collision cannot happen between separate RTP sessions. Suggest  
changing the last sentence of the section to "Note that this is not  
an issue for separate RTP sessions which use independent keying  
material".

Section 6: "Since DTLS is a point-to-point protocol, DTLS-SRTP is  
intended only to protect unicast RTP sessions.  This does not  
preclude its use with RTP mixers". This is true, but incomplete, and  
I suggest adding "...or RTP translators, and does not limit the RTP  
session to only two participants" to the end. An informative  
reference to RFC 5117 might also be appropriate.

-- 
Colin Perkins
http://csperkins.org/

---

From: David McGrew <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 29 Jul 2008 11:32:29 -0700

Hi Colin,

sounds good, thanks for the suggested text.

David