Re: [MMUSIC] ICE-SIP-SDP: Concluding ICE statement

Roman Shpount <roman@telurix.com> Thu, 18 July 2019 23:04 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 E28AD120106 for <mmusic@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 18 Jul 2019 16:04:43 -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 mi5ynLPJXKpK for <mmusic@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 18 Jul 2019 16:04:42 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-pg1-x532.google.com (mail-pg1-x532.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::532]) (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 9BE1012011A for <mmusic@ietf.org>; Thu, 18 Jul 2019 16:04:41 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-pg1-x532.google.com with SMTP id u17so13550273pgi.6 for <mmusic@ietf.org>; Thu, 18 Jul 2019 16:04:41 -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=GFvkFWZ446qLaz3Zx1pdA6CYod7OEk+MKSH6H3r7BOs=; b=AH3izG3/JhNj3Obk+7F0f20CnmIeHKb25eZmAGBSLBRx06wObG9ny9iak9dG41uSgY x3sM2fCpHdaMqg2p91qQjd5Pv7Bj0LZh9H45cYteDt/5Lu6NS9qgFVDwP25ARi8vX6tl k9TSGDBqKiMpSWDRmYbcF1vbED3Py99L+8POrCaVssvgZpuT2Kh4inrcmSveQDtK2Q0F kzelaIxqMURApWHBOckA8QmIIex0iARelTcfaMcNesp4BgbriWmjSbhMHRNuzSN+FyJC g1nM8wUUGWWfeu/+Fpsx4p1Ryf6eP34SoRHluh7CsFS9cd6M4cFgloxg2//+KNBHBkQQ yAqA==
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=GFvkFWZ446qLaz3Zx1pdA6CYod7OEk+MKSH6H3r7BOs=; b=X60D7lpNRkvRr7yh3FCmA4Wv4jEbwtrtIwxu5aycNtEfeLn5ZPEfgnzgtyzHxrePOC 2Wg7yLE/39eBkkKj+CnuyaTFPEBZcL80uh1Q57q1X4+9KXo+sF+4NYQTOHq14LmIq3a4 jbJ/x+mu5x6+Pk74GNSlyD02xtAQXIraPhsAzXgsVysYRATcjSNYPaNQPpGxjdsSJa6n XhKT2re0AsvTzy1s0U9N7fJpoXJIbcORO3Ks1blf7S7pw3SNxjbvaH82pk1SCU6jsKsp lqH9zyobbGeDN7WRldfiEMsOxSiNrZCBYvtyKpudKftbhLuwgyP761P6SWV+xBkt7KzJ DPfQ==
X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAXwd4ofa+24jhcc5v9Lz88GezyORCMGCQWm3u2Rzzf5DMGVQgPB CwdNTgGvWbFNde7mh7/Jife4T48l
X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqzCUNYvTA//Q5/hH/B/tPk1KxIPakbui3nx/lHjenb+5tepJ0YrR7+H++eebFzmsvpcvNjExw==
X-Received: by 2002:a63:6eca:: with SMTP id j193mr49416139pgc.74.1563491080685; Thu, 18 Jul 2019 16:04:40 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-pg1-f176.google.com (mail-pg1-f176.google.com. [209.85.215.176]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id k186sm9265071pga.68.2019.07.18.16.04.39 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=AEAD-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Thu, 18 Jul 2019 16:04:39 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-pg1-f176.google.com with SMTP id t132so13542203pgb.9; Thu, 18 Jul 2019 16:04:39 -0700 (PDT)
X-Received: by 2002:a17:90a:bf92:: with SMTP id d18mr55117149pjs.128.1563491078934; Thu, 18 Jul 2019 16:04:38 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <804B6CBB-3614-4CD5-82FC-0E475F716E18@ericsson.com> <CAD5OKxvYQZz_6RpMf9FvSFx+Mz1=cTUC5-cw3o6jVgKqMKLxSQ@mail.gmail.com> <HE1PR07MB316103A8253F36D03E718AB793C90@HE1PR07MB3161.eurprd07.prod.outlook.com> <CAD5OKxv4kSM3xbqB7Kag3=qdV_4W3T9RbB4D-DLXeNJVqqzOwA@mail.gmail.com> <HE1PR07MB31611980F5E438EFA620329C93C80@HE1PR07MB3161.eurprd07.prod.outlook.com> <CAD5OKxsoRrvzvnc4uSwmbJgMzv7Y4bmjPc4fYv4iGhogtyJTzQ@mail.gmail.com> <HE1PR07MB316164B3D661E223F7F892BA93C80@HE1PR07MB3161.eurprd07.prod.outlook.com>
In-Reply-To: <HE1PR07MB316164B3D661E223F7F892BA93C80@HE1PR07MB3161.eurprd07.prod.outlook.com>
From: Roman Shpount <roman@telurix.com>
Date: Thu, 18 Jul 2019 19:04:28 -0400
X-Gmail-Original-Message-ID: <CAD5OKxuA-Kt_NONWorafn1XPNgKJGvR6XLb2f5sx+_WkW4hz-A@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CAD5OKxuA-Kt_NONWorafn1XPNgKJGvR6XLb2f5sx+_WkW4hz-A@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="0000000000005e9857058dfca280"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/mmusic/AC4DMZ2afhq73ce0JOPJMnLQXo4>
Subject: Re: [MMUSIC] ICE-SIP-SDP: Concluding ICE statement
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: Thu, 18 Jul 2019 23:04:44 -0000

On Thu, Jul 18, 2019 at 6:18 PM Christer Holmberg <
christer.holmberg@ericsson.com> wrote:

> >>>This makes sense, but I am not sure it is precise enough. What we are
> trying to say is that ICE nomination
>
> >>>process is done (completed or failed) for all streams and no new
> candidate pairs are going to be nominated.
>
> >>
>
> >> The text talks about when the nomination starts.
>
> >>
>
> >>>Starts or ends?
>
> >>>
>
> >>>The sentence in 3.3.4 was supposed to mean that when ICE nomination
> process completes and if for any stream non-default
>
> >>>>candidate was nominated and ice2 option was not set, to send a new
> offer.
>
> >>
>
> >> It also says that :)
>
> >>
>
> >> But, the first sentence says:
>
> >>
>
> >>“Once the state of each check list is Completed, and if the agent is
>
> >>the controlling agent, it nominates a candidate pair [RFC8445]…”
>
> >>
>
> >>…which at least to me describes when the nomination starts.
>
> >
>
> > This is actually still about the nomination end. Essentially, what is
> described here is at the end of the nomination process,
> >for each stream a candidate pair is nominated (or the stream failed). If
> ice2 option is not set, and pair nominated in the end
> >is not the default candidate pair for this stream, then new offer should
> be sent to "true up" default candidates.
>
> >
>
> >What this whole language is missing is that for some streams nomination
> can fail without failure of the entire session. Stream failure
>
> >should also result in a new offer with the failed streams disabled (port
> set to 0). I am not sure this is specified anywhere. Another thing
>
> >which is not specified anywhere if new offer due to stream failure is
> only required if ice2 option is not set or always. I would vote for
>
> >always to make sure this m= line can be reused.
>
>
>
> Not sure what you mean by “nominating process”. My understanding of
> “nomination” is when the agent picks a Valid Pair and sends a STUN request
> with the nomination bit set.
>
>
>
> But, in any case the “Once the state of each check list is Completed,”
> statement is wrong.  Of course an implementation might mandate that each
> check list must be Completed in order to establish the session, but there
> is no requirement in the ICE standard that each check list has to be
> Completed in order to do so
>
>
>
The language is about end of ICE process, when all candidate lists are in
either Completed or Failed state. Nominated pair at the time the list is in
the Completed state is the final pair used for communications.
_____________
Roman Shpount