Subject: [Sipbrandy] OSRTP Question

From: "Ben Campbell" <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 22 Sep 2016 19:28:32 -0500

Hi,

In the discussions about what status OSRTP should be, I was under the 
impression that people thought that the draft modified (or violated) 
some normative statement about using encryption with AVP rather than 
SAVP. Can anyone point me to the specifics?

Thanks!

Ben.

---

From: Gonzalo Camarillo <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 23 Sep 2016 08:58:18 +0300

Hi,

for context, Ben's question relates to the following paragraph in the
minutes of the last SIPBRANDY session:

https://www.ietf.org/proceedings/96/minutes/minutes-96-sipbrandy

> The group agreed on advancing the osrtp draft as Proposed
> Standard. However, the SIPBRANDY WG is not chartered to develop new
> protocol mechanisms. Ben, the resposible area director for the
> SIPBRANDY WG, will look into this and get back to the group with a
> final plan. In the meantime, the working assumption is that the
> intended status of the osrtp draft will be Proposed Standard.

Cheers,

Gonzalo

On 23/09/2016 3:28 AM, Ben Campbell wrote:
> _______________________________________________
> Sipbrandy mailing list
> [email-masked]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sipbrandy