Re: [MMUSIC] ICE and offer/answer terminology

["Stach, Thomas" <[e-mail]>]

I think this is fine

Regards
Thomas


> 
> Hi all,
> 
> We didn't have time for this open issue on Monday meeting so we'll take it
> here on the list.
> 
> While ICE is no longer bound to SIP and SDP offer/answer, the document uses
> terms "offer" and "answer" heavily, starting in the title ("ICE: A Protocol
> for NAT Traversal for Offer/Answer Protocols") and abstract ("ICE can be used
> by any protocol utilizing the offer/answer model [...]").
> 
> I think we need to update the title and abstract so that it's more clear that
> protocols that don't follow the o/a model are not excluded. Text suggestions
> are welcome. Maybe in title we call this just "ICE: A Protocol for NAT
> Traversal".
> 
> Then, throughout the text we need to refer to the exchange of candidates
> somehow. Originally this was referred to as the "SDP offer" and "SDP answer".
> Currently we use "ICE offer" and "ICE answer". My suggestion would be to keep
> the "(ICE) offer/answer" terminology here but clarify in the beginning of the
> document that with the offer and answer we refer to the ICE candidate
> exchange.
> 
> Opinions?
> 
> 
> Cheers,
> Ari