Re: [Ice] Re-nomination and candidate pair switching in RFC 5245bis - PROPOSAL

Nils Ohlmeier <nohlmeier@mozilla.com> Wed, 06 September 2017 00:54 UTC

Return-Path: <nohlmeier@mozilla.com>
X-Original-To: ice@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ice@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C243113214D for <ice@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 5 Sep 2017 17:54:55 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.999
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.999 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=mozilla.com
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Xz0DlD2ODsO8 for <ice@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 5 Sep 2017 17:54:53 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-pg0-x22d.google.com (mail-pg0-x22d.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400e:c05::22d]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 173A31252BA for <ice@ietf.org>; Tue, 5 Sep 2017 17:54:53 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-pg0-x22d.google.com with SMTP id 63so3318801pgc.1 for <ice@ietf.org>; Tue, 05 Sep 2017 17:54:52 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=mozilla.com; s=google; h=from:message-id:mime-version:subject:date:in-reply-to:cc:to :references; bh=qON/Qg9M7UEWtqRJE2NOLpEpw01g+YS+xYYY2cV7mik=; b=TWWlaYyO/rm17FGEXIvyICY5t5blCfcUg/ZL3IF9Wwgq9E2788NuKL1uTA/9jM/vYv nV6eutvnRGQJTgmuLOekmmmmu7oZap9xO8V7lGplr55AiUNcvkySBBP4jZ0tQARlxgHv B9ydm9Gbg6DDJdkWpWJt+TL/WrXG6Xl/BuWJY=
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:from:message-id:mime-version:subject:date :in-reply-to:cc:to:references; bh=qON/Qg9M7UEWtqRJE2NOLpEpw01g+YS+xYYY2cV7mik=; b=E3pooLBA05mUfzHEbwEZvMKw5BopHxU73llYl4VksQ0J/WEhd7ZOcTGLU3eoVkI70k xiS1g3e7sFxuL6fi79kx3bz+CE6NY3pvAhPlPr6WRU0ilOgR1qnlYr1/1/w5zewqvk5B qGCyFYP6paevE44JJoIh7StUmhleiCvdspO0PAlbSPDoHLrsS73EMvL7ttGb3ZaebgUU zrvt06RWoAl6p05Ld4bHTHvNn8zkGR+qpNhVxvV43Xi5xlYkZ9H3Bu+wRoDYpkVAd2lr ngMZfpS85ZlLcFP9hOQ6g1xP7fNkFdJ52V7NpQCsW8bfwDLQOrvXt0EvO/K9Ne/ryNsv wMfg==
X-Gm-Message-State: AHPjjUjxM1X4ZGUUBhJTLN7sdr6EfXvFBbytsSP6a8M1MKeFii0ikVBi BDwz3AZNcr95bc4l
X-Google-Smtp-Source: ADKCNb5/ydWQK14pH6mm1lYq3sbHXM8uVaHIr3Ox1tiyGcIIFcX6SO37BPfQ4Y/wmH0a5pUmCDJ++g==
X-Received: by 10.98.71.153 with SMTP id p25mr5557819pfi.84.1504659292551; Tue, 05 Sep 2017 17:54:52 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [192.168.2.22] (c-107-3-154-7.hsd1.ca.comcast.net. [107.3.154.7]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id m24sm233746pfg.31.2017.09.05.17.54.50 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Tue, 05 Sep 2017 17:54:51 -0700 (PDT)
From: Nils Ohlmeier <nohlmeier@mozilla.com>
Message-Id: <DBBDBA3A-A422-4123-B075-B9BFA0CACFE9@mozilla.com>
Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="Apple-Mail=_51407FE9-02D8-4015-8E49-AB5D259FBDD2"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; micalg="pgp-sha512"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 10.3 \(3273\))
Date: Tue, 05 Sep 2017 17:54:49 -0700
In-Reply-To: <CAJrXDUFPV-Z-QZUhU_WzmexBj9WC5ppOdYYsshxhmKUxz34k8A@mail.gmail.com>
Cc: Christer Holmberg <christer.holmberg@ericsson.com>, Bernard Aboba <bernard.aboba@gmail.com>, Emil Ivov <emcho@jitsi.org>, "ice@ietf.org" <ice@ietf.org>
To: Peter Thatcher <pthatcher@google.com>
References: <7594FB04B1934943A5C02806D1A2204B4CC9ED94@ESESSMB109.ericsson.se> <CAJrXDUHGYkivt5+dnX48C8TkR9W7afoUWAPv8+MbafYNsZsFmA@mail.gmail.com> <CAOW+2duR54wenv088kZSmKJj56u8j=Qi6KzNUNrjA0=o5qhekg@mail.gmail.com> <CAJrXDUEKWCa7GsL_bSrdvVN-erROSgHJt5DO5VOZ2Qx3PQr15g@mail.gmail.com> <CAJrXDUH6vvauP8Bj2k+e5B=reTM=5C+vwD0+WidtdTRW5MpdAA@mail.gmail.com> <0447726F-82C7-43D8-99AE-5B72F0B55B6C@gmail.com> <7594FB04B1934943A5C02806D1A2204B5626F889@ESESSMB102.ericsson.se> <CAOW+2dv9UqW3J+Z_zQYb1fSbOoPkzc2Guiw5eHng-LbwheQ-cg@mail.gmail.com> <7594FB04B1934943A5C02806D1A2204B56289F26@ESESSMB109.ericsson.se> <D5D41E9F.20FC9%christer.holmberg@ericsson.com> <F4BD86AC-FB1D-4CE7-AF91-98562B5E89AA@gmail.com> <D5D471D9.21011%christer.holmberg@ericsson.com> <CAJrXDUFPV-Z-QZUhU_WzmexBj9WC5ppOdYYsshxhmKUxz34k8A@mail.gmail.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3273)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ice/Ft8Dmd6uysWoenKUJ_5GHoxodKs>
Subject: Re: [Ice] Re-nomination and candidate pair switching in RFC 5245bis - PROPOSAL
X-BeenThere: ice@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
Precedence: list
List-Id: "Interactive Connectivity Establishment \(ICE\)" <ice.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/ice>, <mailto:ice-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/ice/>
List-Post: <mailto:ice@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ice-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ice>, <mailto:ice-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 06 Sep 2017 00:54:56 -0000

> On Sep 5, 2017, at 16:48, Peter Thatcher <pthatcher@google.com> wrote:
> 
> Thinking about this some more: I think it's fine if 5245bis says that you can't renominate.  We could say "an ICE option or extension may allow renomination", but we could just put that in a new ICE option or extension (like https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-thatcher-ice-renomination-01 <https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-thatcher-ice-renomination-01>).  Then it's clear that without the extension, you can't, but with the extension you can.

+1

  Nils Ohlmeier

> 
> 
> On Tue, Sep 5, 2017 at 5:26 AM Christer Holmberg <christer.holmberg@ericsson.com <mailto:christer.holmberg@ericsson.com>> wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> >>Peter (and others interested),
> >>
> >> IF you want some change to the current behaviour, where a re-nomination
> >>is
> >> NOT allowed, you need to participate in the discussion NOW. We are
> >>moving
> >> towards WGLC, and we should close the window for technical changes
> >> (non-bug fixing).
> >>
> >> If I understood Bernard correctly, he was asking for having multiple
> >> SIMULTANEOUS nominations, in order to do RTP multipath stuff etc. I
> >> personally think that is outside the scope of 5245bis. I think the
> >> question is whether we should allow re-nominations of single candidate
> >> pairs.
> >
> >[BA] Actually, I was just trying to understand what the current draft
> >allows and why. As it stands, the draft appears to support multi-path RTP
> >before nomination, but not after.
> 
> Currently, the draft allows switching between pairs before nomination,
> yes. As for WHY, I assume it is to allow media transport before the ICE
> procedures have finished.
> 
> Regards,
> 
> Christer
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> >
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Ice mailing list
> Ice@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ice