Re: [MMUSIC] [Ice] ICE WG Charter version 2 (Proposed changes)

"Ben Campbell" <> Mon, 28 September 2015 19:54 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost ( []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 311441B2C40; Mon, 28 Sep 2015 12:54:51 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -0.011
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.011 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_20=-0.001, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01] autolearn=ham
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Nc3AZRdlpj92; Mon, 28 Sep 2015 12:54:49 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( [IPv6:2001:470:d:1130::1]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 76A291B2C41; Mon, 28 Sep 2015 12:54:49 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [] ( []) (authenticated bits=0) by (8.15.2/8.14.9) with ESMTPSA id t8SJsPZZ015210 (version=TLSv1 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NO); Mon, 28 Sep 2015 14:54:35 -0500 (CDT) (envelope-from
X-Authentication-Warning: Host [] claimed to be []
From: Ben Campbell <>
To: Pal Martinsen <>, Marc Petit-Huguenin <>
Date: Mon, 28 Sep 2015 14:54:25 -0500
Message-ID: <>
In-Reply-To: <>
References: <>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Mailer: MailMate (1.9.2r5107)
Archived-At: <>
Cc: mmusic <>,
Subject: Re: [MMUSIC] [Ice] ICE WG Charter version 2 (Proposed changes)
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: Multiparty Multimedia Session Control Working Group <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 28 Sep 2015 19:54:51 -0000

I think this version looks good enough for the IESG internal review. 
Unless I see an objection really soon now, I will update the charter in 
the datatracker to match.



On 25 Sep 2015, at 4:18, Pal Martinsen (palmarti) wrote:

> Hi,
> Based on mailing-list discussions i propose the following changes:
> (A pull request can be found at: 
> - Merge section 1 and 3. Moved former 2 to 1.
> Better introduction to what ICE is and having all the history in the 
> same section. The intended effect of the edit is to emphasise the 
> versatility of ICE and maybe attract more “network” people to 
> attend join the wg.
> - Rewrote the start of the goal section to pass strict parsers.
> “The goal of the ICE Working Group is to consolidate the various 
> initiatives to update and improve ICE, and to help ensure suitability 
> and consistency in the environments ICE operates in.”
> I wanted to remove webRTC from the sentence. If WG FOO comes with the 
> same amount of positive energy to help improve ICE  I think it would 
> deserve to get the same amount of attention.
> The charter would then look like:
> Charter for Working Group
> Interactive Connectivity Establishment (ICE) is at the same time a NAT 
> traversal technique, a multihomed address selection technique, and a 
> dual stack address selection technique that works by including a 
> multiplicity of IP addresses and ports in both the request and 
> response messages of a connectivity establishment transaction. It 
> makes no assumptions regarding network topology on the local or remote 
> side.
> Interactive Connectivity Establishment was published as RFC 5245 in 
> April 2010. Until recently the protocol had seen rather limited 
> deployment. This situation has changed drastically as ICE is mandatory 
> to implement
> in WebRTC, a set of technologies developed at the IETF and W3C to 
> standardize Real Time Communication on the Web. ICE was originally 
> defined for the Offer-Answer (RFC 3264) protocol used by SIP (RFC 
> 3261). Later XMPP (XEP-0176), RTSP (draft-ietf-mmusic-rtsp-nat), 
> RTCWeb (draft-ietf-rtcweb-jsep) and other realtime media establishment 
> protocol have used the protocol. ICE is also used by non-realtime 
> media protocols, like HIP (RFC 5770) and RELOAD (RFC 6940).
> The goal of the ICE Working Group is to consolidate the various 
> initiatives to update and improve ICE, and to help ensure suitability 
> and consistency in the environments ICE operates in. Current work in 
> this area includes an updated version of the ICE RFC (ICEbis), Trickle 
> ICE and dualstack/multihomed fairness. It is worth noticing that this 
> work will make ICE more flexible, robust and more suitable for 
> changing mobile environments without major changes to the original ICE 
> RFC. The ICE workgroup will consider new work items that follow this 
> pattern.
> ICE is an application controlled protocol that leverages a set of 
> network defined protocols. The STUN (RFC 5389), TURN (RFC 5766) and 
> related protocol work done in the TRAM working group must be closely 
> synchronized with the work in this working group. To avoid 
> interoperability issues and unwanted behavior it is desired to 
> increase the interaction with other working groups dealing with 
> network protocols closer to the wire. Example of such work may be, but 
> not limited to; issues regarding multi-homing, multi subnet and 
> prefixes, QoS, transport selection and congestion control. From the 
> application side, the users of ICE, there is a need to make sure what 
> is specified is actually usable. Getting input from the application 
> working groups will be helpful (RTCWEB, HIP, MMUSIC, P2PSIP, PPSP).
> .-.
> Pål-Erik
> _______________________________________________
> Ice mailing list