Re: [Ice] Review of draft-holmberg-ice-pac-01

Note that the app can always decide to declare failure at any point and
invoke an ICE restart.

On Sun, Mar 31, 2019 at 1:12 AM Christer Holmberg <
christer.holmberg@ericsson.com> wrote:

> Hi,
>
>
>
> Doing an ICE restart means you have to collect and exchange candidates
> again. Of course one can do that once ICE failure has been declared, and
> nothing prevents one from doing an ICE restart after that if one thinks the
> result will be different. But, the focus of the draft is not to declare ICE
> failure while working candidates may still arrive.
>
>
>
> Having said that, one should of course not wait forever for the peer
> reflexive candidates. The draft will not mandate a specific time value, but
> there probably will be a little more text about things to take into
> consideration when determining how long to wait.
>
>
>
> Regards,
>
>
>
> Christer
>
>
>
> *From: *Ice <ice-bounces@ietf.org> on behalf of Qingsi Wang <qingsi=
> 40google.com@dmarc.ietf.org>
> *Date: *Saturday, 30 March 2019 at 3.05
> *To: *"ice@ietf.org" <ice@ietf.org>
> *Subject: *[Ice] Review of draft-holmberg-ice-pac-01
>
>
>
> If all available candidate pairs have either performed triggered checks or
> sent check response, but have timed out their checks however, should we
> cancel the timer and conclude a failure? The rationale is to wait for
> inbound checks, but if at least one round of checks are received, it's
> unclear to me if the waiting would benefit compared to allowing the app
> trigger an ICE restart after firing an failure.
>
>
>
> The rest looks good to me.
>
>
>
> Best,
>
> Qingsi
> _______________________________________________
> Ice mailing list
> Ice@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ice
>