[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

RE: DTLS-SRTP harming GETS [was RE: Additional use cases? (Re: Plan for moving forward)]

To: "'Lakshminath Dondeti'" <ldondeti@xxxxxxxxxxxx>, "'Eric Rescorla'" <ekr@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: RE: DTLS-SRTP harming GETS [was RE: Additional use cases? (Re: Plan for moving forward)]
From: "Dan Wing" <dwing@xxxxxxxxx>
Date: Tue, 12 Jun 2007 22:06:22 -0700
Authentication-results: sj-dkim-1; header.From=dwing@xxxxxxxxx; dkim=pass (s ig from cisco.com/sjdkim1004 verified; );
Cc: "'Jonathan Rosenberg'" <jdrosen@xxxxxxxxx>, "'Hannes Tschofenig'" <Hannes.Tschofenig@xxxxxxx>, "'Francois Audet'" <audet@xxxxxxxxxx>, <ietf-rtpsec@xxxxxxx>, "'Sam Hartman'" <hartmans-ietf@xxxxxxx>, "'Tim Polk'" <tim.polk@xxxxxxxx>, <jon.peterson@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Dkim-signature: v=0.5; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; l=212; t=1181711192; x=1182575192; c=relaxed/simple; s=sjdkim1004; h=Content-Type:From:Subject:Content-Transfer-Encoding:MIME-Version; d=cisco.com; i=dwing@xxxxxxxxx; z=From:=20=22Dan=20Wing=22=20<dwing@xxxxxxxxx> |Subject:=20RE=3A=20DTLS-SRTP=20harming=20GETS=20[was=20RE=3A=20Additiona l=20use=20cases?=20(Re=3A=20Plan=20for=20moving=20forward)] |Sender:=20; bh=Yzvot342yevUpM45/PWbCP7JS0IDEm3nBO3og7uUdE0=; b=u+IOIpNq2GS00H7tTz2ggYcrRDUWU+5ZKkiFVvbCsNunIygvhfdmcPwtMkOHOnLEJy/lZjzm JgzW866QOEG/E1kM9+SEs2/2KKQPS0lIGmoAkaTm14lcyC5sMMz2ah+82VuefYMpzntY56l33n 8I90CmJx/UX415cYseucJcJ/0=;
In-reply-to: <466F70A7.6080704@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
List-archive: <http://www.imc.org/ietf-rtpsec/mail-archive/>
List-id: <ietf-rtpsec.imc.org>
List-unsubscribe: <mailto:ietf-rtpsec-request@imc.org?body=unsubscribe>
Sender: owner-ietf-rtpsec@xxxxxxxxxxxx
Thread-index: AcetckKvADxSEd+JQdWgMbbPosfkhgABjiOw

> What if the callee (calling card 
> gateway) does not care which phone the calling card user may be 
> using?  That is a real scenario!

Then it could omit asking for its peer's certificate in DTLS.

-d

References:
- Re: DTLS-SRTP harming GETS [was RE: Additional use cases? (Re: Plan for moving forward)]
  - From: Lakshminath Dondeti

Prev by Date: Re: DTLS-SRTP harming GETS [was RE: Additional use cases? (Re: Plan for moving forward)]
Previous by thread: Re: DTLS-SRTP harming GETS [was RE: Additional use cases? (Re: Plan for moving forward)]
Next by thread: Re: DTLS-SRTP harming GETS [was RE: Additional use cases? (Re: Plan for moving forward)]
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread