Re: [Dart] ICE might send your traffic over TCP

> >> The problem is that the way the WebRTC APIs are structured, it's not
> >> necessarily clear to an application that its media traffic is indeed going
> >> over TCP, so it might make precedence requests that the browser implementing
> >> the APIs can't (and shouldn't try to) satisfy.

I agree ... fortunately, the browser implementation of the APIs has to translate
from the application priority to DSCP .  As ICE is also running in that browser,
that API implementation should know whether ICE did send all the traffic over TCP
 in which case, it has to pick once DSCP and use it for all traffic :-(.

> > What would we expect DART to say about this? It seems to me that we should
> > point out that we think different drop precedences for a single TCP
> > connections doesn't make sense. But it is RTCWEB's issue to think things
> > through if they have a use case that might make this happen, isn't it?

The normative text for that single DSCP usage  will wind up in the
rtcweb-transports draft (just confirmed in the rtcweb meeting this afternoon),
but it seems useful to repeat this in the DART draft and extend it to include
TURN use of TCP, both client to TURN server and TURN server to peer.

> Maybe not for dart, but for turn: tunnel the drop precedence through
> turn so it can be applied on the other end???

Unless specified/deployed TURN can already do that, it's out of scope for DART,
IMHO.

Thanks,
--David

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Dart [mailto:dart-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Paul Kyzivat
> Sent: Thursday, July 24, 2014 5:17 PM
> To: dart@ietf.org
> Subject: Re: [Dart] ICE might send your traffic over TCP
> 
> On 7/24/14 3:44 PM, Ben Campbell wrote:
> > (as individual)
> >
> > On Jul 24, 2014, at 9:00 AM, Jonathan Lennox <jonathan@vidyo.com> wrote:
> >
> >> I don't think different drop precedences would be useful in respect to TCP.
> >>
> >> The problem is that the way the WebRTC APIs are structured, it's not
> necessarily clear to an application that its media traffic is indeed going
> over TCP, so it might make precedence requests that the browser implementing
> the APIs can't (and shouldn't try to) satisfy.
> >>
> >> The question is how the browser should behave when that happens.  I spoke
> to Cullen about this, offline, after the DART session, and I believe he had a
> simple proposal.
> >>
> >
> > What would we expect DART to say about this? It seems to me that we should
> point out that we think different drop precedences for a single TCP
> connections doesn't make sense. But it is RTCWEB's issue to think things
> through if they have a use case that might make this happen, isn't it?
> 
> Maybe not for dart, but for turn: tunnel the drop precedence through
> turn so it can be applied on the other end???
> 
> 	Thanks,
> 	Paul
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Dart mailing list
> Dart@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dart