Subject: [MMUSIC] Stephen Farrell's Discuss on draft-ietf-mmusic-msid-14: (with DISCUSS)

From: "Stephen Farrell" <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 16 Jun 2016 04:39:38 -0700

Stephen Farrell has entered the following ballot position for
draft-ietf-mmusic-msid-14: Discuss

When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all
email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this
introductory paragraph, however.)

Please refer to https://www.ietf.org/iesg/statement/discuss-criteria.html
for more information about IESG DISCUSS and COMMENT positions.

The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here:
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-mmusic-msid/

----------------------------------------------------------------------
DISCUSS:
----------------------------------------------------------------------

I'm not sure that the answer to this question will require any
change to the document but wanted to check... 

I wondered about the privacy properties of these (and related)
WebRTC identifiers, esp. if they are being handled at various
different layers. Is there work somewhere in the WebRTC space
that's analysing that? For example, one concern might be that
msid-appdata could end up with some kind of privacy sensitive
value, but there's no guidance here about that and as the
examples use UUIDs it's not clear to me those represent nor what
typical values will be used. (Note: I'm not saying that I
believe this is a problem, I'm just checking if it's been
considered.)

I hope that there's no reason why these can't be very ephemeral
values that don't identify (or help re-identification of) people
or their preferences, locations etc., and I'd imagine there's
little reason to e.g. log them. If that's the case wouldn't it
be useful to add such guidance (somewhere, maybe not here)
to help developers to do the right thing?

---

From: Alissa Cooper <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 16 Jun 2016 07:20:07 -0700

> On Jun 16, 2016, at 4:39 AM, Stephen Farrell <[email-masked]> wrote:
> 

I wonder if adding a reference to https://www.w3.org/TR/mediacapture-streams/#dom-mediastream-id <https://www.w3.org/TR/mediacapture-streams/#dom-mediastream-id> or parroting that guidance would help.

Alissa

---

From: Stephen Farrell <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 16 Jun 2016 15:21:54 +0100

> I wonder if adding a reference to https://www.w3.org/TR/mediacapture-streams/#dom-mediastream-id <https://www.w3.org/TR/mediacapture-streams/#dom-mediastream-id> or parroting that guidance would he…

That'd certainly be good enough to clear the discuss. I'd still
be interested in an answer to the general question as well, but
that'd not be blocking.

Cheers,
S.