Re: [MMUSIC] ICE candidate address selection update draft

Simon Perreault <> Wed, 01 August 2012 23:54 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id D86CE21F8999 for <>; Wed, 1 Aug 2012 16:54:21 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.543
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.543 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.057, BAYES_00=-2.599, NO_RELAYS=-0.001]
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id pb5prIbyUUKT for <>; Wed, 1 Aug 2012 16:54:21 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from (unknown [IPv6:2620:0:230:8000:226:55ff:fe57:14db]) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id D35BD21F8995 for <>; Wed, 1 Aug 2012 16:54:20 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from (unknown [IPv6:2001:df8:0:16:34aa:41c2:abef:4aa7]) by (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id B467B448B0 for <>; Wed, 1 Aug 2012 19:54:19 -0400 (EDT)
Message-ID: <>
Date: Wed, 01 Aug 2012 16:54:19 -0700
From: Simon Perreault <>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:14.0) Gecko/20120717 Thunderbird/14.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <>
In-Reply-To: <>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Subject: Re: [MMUSIC] ICE candidate address selection update draft
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: Multiparty Multimedia Session Control Working Group <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 01 Aug 2012 23:54:22 -0000

Le 2012-08-01 16:35, Ari Keranen a écrit :
> And the draft here:
> Give the doc a quick read if you already haven't (it's only couple of
> pages), let us know if there's something to fix, and if you think it's a
> good idea, feel free to +1 for WG adoption.

+1 for WG adoption

I just read the draft. It's simple, it makes sense, and it fixes a real 
bug in the ICE spec.

One comment:

>    o  Candidate addresses from Unique Local Addresses (ULAs) MUST NOT be
>       combined with any other candidates except other ULA candidates.

That would fail if you're behind an NPTv6 thingie that maps the ULA to a 
global prefix. So maybe remove that rule.

>    o  Local relayed candidates MUST NOT be combined with remote host
>       candidates from IPv4 private address space [RFC1918] or IPv6 link-
>       local addresses or ULAs.

Same comment here about the "or ULAs" part.

DTN made easy, lean, and smart -->
NAT64/DNS64 open-source        -->
STUN/TURN server               -->