[MMUSIC] IETF#93: Minutes from 1st MMUSIC session.

[Christer Holmberg <[e-mail]>]

Hi,

Below are my notes from the 1st MMUSIC session.

Regards,

Christer

-------------------------




TOPIC      Administrative/Agenda/Status

PRESENTER  Ari (chair)



The chair presented what has happened (published RFCs etc) since the previous meeting, and the current draft status.





TOPIC      ICE Multihomes and IPv4/IPv6 Dual Stack Fairness

PRESENTER  P-E Martinsen

DRAFT      draft-ietf-mmusic-ice-dualstack-fairness



It was discussed whether a GitHub reference can be used within the draft. It should not be an issues, as the reference is informative.



There were questions to clarify on whether the draft changes the candidate priority, and/or the order in which connectivity checks are performed. It was indicated that the order needs to be the same on both endpoints, even if one endpoint does not support the mechanism.



Related to the text on multihoming, it was indicated that there is currently an ongoing discussion on the RTCWEB mailing list on whether STUN requests must be sent on all available interfaces.



It was indicated that there were objections to the mechanism at the previous meeting. As the individual who raised the objections did not participate in this session, it was asked whether the individual still has the same issues.



It was discussed whether the draft should be standards track or informational. AGREEMENT: Move the draft forward as informational.



The following individuals volunteered to review the draft: Simon, Emil, Jonathan L and Moe.







TOPIC      Trickle ICE

PRESENTER  Emil Ivov

DRAFT      draft-ietf-mmusic-trickle-ice





AGREEMENT: We will use 0.0.0.0 instead of ::.



AGREEMENT: The usage of 0.0.0.0 will not be an update to RFC 3264. It will be an extension to RFC 3264 procedures when trickle ICE is used.



The following individuals volunteered to review the draft: P-E, Jonathan L, Brandon.







TOPIC      Trickle ICE for SIP

PRESENTER  Emil Ivov

DRAFT      draft-ietf-mmusic-trickle-ice-sip



There was a discussion on the rates of INFO requests, and whether the draft needs to define an interval.



Indicated that there are issues with sdpfrag, which will be sent to the mailing list.



The following individuals volunteered to review the draft: Jonathan L and Simon.







TOPIC      Passive/Aggressive Nomination

PRESENTER  Justin Uberti
DRAFT      draft-uberti-mmusic-nombis



The draft deprecates ICE aggressive nomination, and introduces a new mode which contains the best parts from aggressive- and regular nomination:



-   Can send media as soon as a single check succeeds (like aggressive)

-   Controlling side has full discretion on which pair is used (like regular)

-   Controlled side knows when nomination is complete (like regular)



The presenter suggested that there should not be a mechanism for negotiating usage of the mechanism. The reason was that it would introduce a new ICE mode. Instead we would have only one mode. The presenter that the approach is backward compatible, but it was indicated that some actual testing is needed in order to verify that. There were talks about organizing an interop event.



AGREEMENT: The draft needs implementers guidance regarding designing protocols that run on top of ICE. Such protocols should take into consideration that candidates may switch.



There was discussion on whether it should be incorporated into the ICE-bis specification. Indicated that we need experience first, and that the idea of ICE-bis was to make bug fixes etc, not to introduce new features.





TOPIC      Experimental Determination of a Lower Bound for Ta

PRESENTER  Peter Thatcher



The results of the tests that have been performed by Google were presented.