Re: [MMUSIC] ICE-SIP-SDP: Question on ice-pacing attribute

Roman Shpount <roman@telurix.com> Wed, 17 July 2019 22:41 UTC

Return-Path: <roman@telurix.com>
X-Original-To: mmusic@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: mmusic@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4E74E120230 for <mmusic@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 17 Jul 2019 15:41:01 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.887
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.887 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, T_SPF_PERMERROR=0.01, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=telurix-com.20150623.gappssmtp.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 iBp-DmLSFvdl for <mmusic@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 17 Jul 2019 15:40:59 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-pf1-x433.google.com (mail-pf1-x433.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::433]) (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 172F012016F for <mmusic@ietf.org>; Wed, 17 Jul 2019 15:40:59 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-pf1-x433.google.com with SMTP id r7so11565430pfl.3 for <mmusic@ietf.org>; Wed, 17 Jul 2019 15:40:59 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=telurix-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=HPSL0RFHWnltuyErMdV4QSPiI1xSFS8kbtkx7t/Dq68=; b=Uw0PAW30vPGJruJ9mnnZoyXqri9IRK3uORZdWZCnhoWHcID0zk/0hCZEdPLTMVUOZn P1rV4scFSbKE9LmtCoORfTM4+lABHApuVBkYao8DH+rQ4bcYh4hnQvMhV2EjWBRKmxbT hemfO0v7X/1Da/ncEe3/sme7oONtjjDhIIURLEBIk/YWTeb0MGFuAKwjdp+C5uyUjZsX b/rWGpm0JcsH9oJYfzpZJZTTRjePT9tYONctcZrXiMgUqFriqr8IX0n6O1iHfjkmT2M2 ZYNOn49Ex4843mzgb+TugbyzoqsnyFIXuqfh8+ZqinV32GOZvSf37OqIoP7aicMNWIn2 sp8w==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=HPSL0RFHWnltuyErMdV4QSPiI1xSFS8kbtkx7t/Dq68=; b=aeWEXYnv4Izh00YXHwgT6O8qNz+qx+JQ4ghr7WtDY/5ONbk1W75phydCp+aY9GuaZc exx5rmOiJCRVERGVfLVJyci0KQyxFkKjdMUgLEYLzthch3EZdq2Q56OLzFjCCSZWozl4 29bFMhkfkzi/W7OnUl3lgrjgjJArlshhD4eiFzH+GrO/h06TTZAbYYTeH7x6RaqKxZqo WtP6AALpS3Lupb6yZZ2pjMR6TZXTjRFcqhP5uKzUoT/aqfnet/VH4lvwcLhowlbVt32Z C21k4F5AK0uApQmNtEA7/kuePwGPF5a4/LVQkww8mgwY3b2EaxmwTVzl6PR87e8ni14T 3Fnw==
X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAWM8mmGdV88ZdDy28uqW1c8DLUe+thTaaVUo3YaQxJucvL1MVP0 POux4L9jhB7gBA15VspZxOvP9ipY
X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqzEXkG7Wzqsff1QNh+OCbCXV3XzXdTiIEKp81P0RyBxWELzQ6iK6h40ULPzwH7hifXX6+iGOw==
X-Received: by 2002:a17:90a:35e5:: with SMTP id r92mr47726695pjb.34.1563403258387; Wed, 17 Jul 2019 15:40:58 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-pf1-f177.google.com (mail-pf1-f177.google.com. [209.85.210.177]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id e5sm31330095pfd.56.2019.07.17.15.40.57 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=AEAD-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Wed, 17 Jul 2019 15:40:57 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-pf1-f177.google.com with SMTP id f17so7572221pfn.6; Wed, 17 Jul 2019 15:40:57 -0700 (PDT)
X-Received: by 2002:a17:90a:b104:: with SMTP id z4mr46740662pjq.102.1563403256994; Wed, 17 Jul 2019 15:40:56 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <D7B95418-048F-4C6F-B953-33CC85C5B238@ericsson.com> <CAD5OKxvYCkB-Kz40EYTZADQQJLYKxrTcqNDMaTbDmhD16hrdnw@mail.gmail.com> <HE1PR07MB316129D747E30D434F96832893C90@HE1PR07MB3161.eurprd07.prod.outlook.com>
In-Reply-To: <HE1PR07MB316129D747E30D434F96832893C90@HE1PR07MB3161.eurprd07.prod.outlook.com>
From: Roman Shpount <roman@telurix.com>
Date: Wed, 17 Jul 2019 18:40:46 -0400
X-Gmail-Original-Message-ID: <CAD5OKxv2aDZhy3LM0+7ehNybV14pDFiNwcdOtrLyF7stwPoYeQ@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CAD5OKxv2aDZhy3LM0+7ehNybV14pDFiNwcdOtrLyF7stwPoYeQ@mail.gmail.com>
To: Christer Holmberg <christer.holmberg@ericsson.com>
Cc: "mmusic@ietf.org" <mmusic@ietf.org>, "mmusic-chairs@ietf.org" <mmusic-chairs@ietf.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="000000000000c62131058de82f7e"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/mmusic/6yoDMUV0K5WIfUjJ-PM28ctXXLM>
Subject: Re: [MMUSIC] ICE-SIP-SDP: Question on ice-pacing attribute
X-BeenThere: mmusic@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: Multiparty Multimedia Session Control Working Group <mmusic.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/mmusic>, <mailto:mmusic-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/mmusic/>
List-Post: <mailto:mmusic@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:mmusic-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mmusic>, <mailto:mmusic-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 17 Jul 2019 22:41:01 -0000

On Wed, Jul 17, 2019 at 6:12 PM Christer Holmberg <
christer.holmberg@ericsson.com> wrote:

> >> Before I suggest text, my question is: do we allow modifying the pacing
> mid-session?
>
> >
>
> > We should allow modifying pacing attribute mid-session on ICE restart.
> Due to 3PCC, a new end point
>
> > might join the session without the prior knowledge of the negotiated
> pacing value. In order to support this,
>
> > changes in pacing attribute in combination with ICE-restart must be
> supported. Changes of pacing during ICE
>
> > nomination process (i.e. without ICE restart) are extremely hard to
> implement and should be prohibited.
>
>
>
> If there is a subsequent offer/answer while the ICE processing is ongoing,
> and if we do NOT allow modifying the value (without ICE restart), we need
> to say how/of the attribute is included in such offer/answers. Are endpoint
> mandated to include the previously negotiated value?
>

I would assume that the same values for pacing, ice-options, or ice-lite
should be included unless ICE restart was initiated.


> And, what happens if an agent tries to modify the value (again, without
> ICE restart)?
>

Ignoring the change would be the safer option.

Also, when reading Roman’s 3PCC use-case, I assume we need to specify the
> same for the ice-options attribute?
>

I think this should apply to ice-options and ice-lite attributes as well.
Changing these values mid ICE nomination is not well defined and, most
likely, unnecessary.

Best Regards,
_____________
Roman Shpount