Re: [clue] [Ice] [art] ICE, ICE-bis, and Cluster 238

[Christer Holmberg <[e-mail]>]

Hi,

>>> dig not indicate an improvement of connectivity rates. I did not see 
>>> results from others that did. Some of the early test results from 
>>> others that drove this work were not reproducible in our testing. The 
>>> one thing I think most people did find is that the more out of sync 
>>> the pacing of the two agents was, the worse the connectivity was. But 
>>> all of this is water under the bridge, we have old and new ice, 
>>> people can use either. What we are talking about here is what is the 
>>> minimum bar for WebRTC 1.0
>> 
>> Correct me if I'm wrong, but WebRTC 1.0 does use trickle, and does not use aggressive nomination.
>
> Sorry but that is not correct. Firefox does use aggressive nomination. Chrome (and everyone who copies their 
> full stack including their ICE implementation) does not. I’m not aware of any normative language for any of the 
> WebRTC specs demanding to use full nomination only.

With "full nomination" I assume you mean regular nomination (as defined in 5245)?

My point was that WebRTC defines the usage of "nomination", which is the terminology 8445 uses. I am not saying it's forbidden to use aggressive nomination, but as far as I know (I may be wrong) usage of it is not mentioned anywhere. 

Regards,

Christer