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

[Peter Thatcher <[e-mail]>]

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).
Then it's clear that without the extension, you can't, but with the
extension you can.



On Tue, Sep 5, 2017 at 5:26 AM Christer Holmberg <
[e-mail]> 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
>
>
>
>
>
> >
>
>