5. 安全考虑

本文档的目的是做出澄清, 并减少 RTP 分类法 (RTP taxonomy) 中普遍存在的混淆, 这种混淆源于使用 RTP 协议的多种技术和协议在用语上不一致. 除 RTP 协议 [RFC3550] 以及使用该协议的各项协议规范中已经充分记录的安全考虑之外, 本文档不引入任何新的安全考虑.

具备定义明确的通用术语, 并理解 RTP 架构 (RTP architecture) 的复杂性, 将有助于形成更好的标准, 从而避免安全问题.

6. 资料性参考文献

[RFC3550] Schulzrinne, H., Casner, S., Frederick, R., and V. Jacobson, "RTP: 实时应用程序传输协议", STD 64, RFC 3550, July 2003.
[RFC2198] Perkins, C., et al., "冗余音频数据的 RTP 负载", RFC 2198, September 1997.
[RFC4588] Rey, J., Leon, D., Miyazaki, A., Varsa, V., and R. Hakenberg, "RTP 重传负载格式", RFC 4588, July 2006.
[RFC5109] Li, A., Ed., "通用前向纠错的 RTP 负载格式", RFC 5109, December 2007.
[RFC5576] Lennox, J., Ott, J., and T. Schierl, "会话描述协议 (SDP) 中的特定于源的媒体属性", RFC 5576, June 2009.
[RFC6190] Wenger, S., Wang, Y., Schierl, T., and A. Eleftheriadis, "可伸缩视频编码的 RTP 负载格式", RFC 6190, May 2011.
[RFC7022] Begen, A., Perkins, C., Wing, D., and E. Rescorla, "选择 RTP 控制协议 (RTCP) 规范名称 (CNAMEs) 的指南", RFC 7022, September 2013.

[CLUE-FRAME] Duckworth, M., Pepperell, A., and S. Wenger, "远程呈现多流框架", Work in Progress, April 2015.
[SDP-BUNDLE] Holmberg, C., Alvestrand, H., and C. Jennings, "使用会话描述协议 (SDP) 协商媒体复用", Work in Progress, July 2015.
[WEBRTC] Bergkvist, A., Burnett, D., Jennings, C., and A. Narayanan, "WebRTC 1.0: 浏览器之间的实时通信", W3C Working Draft, September 2015.

[RFC3264] Rosenberg, J. and H. Schulzrinne, "基于会话描述协议 (SDP) 的提议/应答模型", RFC 3264, June 2002.
[RFC3711] Baugher, M., McGrew, D., Naslund, M., Carrara, E., and K. Norrman, "安全实时传输协议 (SRTP)", RFC 3711, March 2004.
[RFC4566] Handley, M., Jacobson, V., and C. Perkins, "SDP: 会话描述协议", RFC 4566, July 2006.
[RFC5117] Westerlund, M. and S. Wenger, "RTP 拓扑", RFC 5117, January 2008.
[RFC5888] Camarillo, G. and H. Schulzrinne, "会话描述协议 (SDP) 分组框架", RFC 5888, June 2010.
[RFC7104] Begen, A., Cai, Y., and H. Ou, "会话描述协议中的重复分组语义", RFC 7104, January 2014.