Re: [MMUSIC] Please Read and Comment: Re: ICE SDP/JSEP peace accords

[Christer Holmberg <[e-mail]>]

Hi,


>>Assuming that the default candidate is UDP, but a TCP candidate is eventually nominated,
>>since there is no update offer does that mean that the setup and connection attributes
>>(and possible other TCP-specific attributes) will never be provided in an offer/answer
>>from the JSEP endpoint? Wouldn’t that also break RFC4145?

>
>Values of setup and other TCP specific attributes are encoded within the TCP ICE candidate.
>Providing TCP connection attributes, or providing any information about the actual nominated
>candidate in c=/m= line in the update offer is optional in ice-sip-sdp.

Ok. I just saw they were included in the examples.

>This typically does not break anything unless signaling agent needs to record the actual
>communication address and protocol used for connection. In case of JSEP, update offer
>can be implemented via the API when ICE nomination is complete. I think it is good enough
>that JSEP API provides a mechanism to develop an offer/answer ICE negotiation compatible
>with RFC5245 but allows to relax those constraints when they are not necessary.

Then ANY app (JSEP or no JSEP) could consider the constraints not being necessary.

But, as you say, eventhough the JSEP API does not automatically provide the updated offer, the JS app can do it.

Regards,

Christer