Re: [MMUSIC] Seriously, USE-CANDIDATE!!! in 5245bis

[Justin Uberti <[e-mail]>]

That part is separable from the basic need for dynamic prioritization.

I will look at the mobility draft to see how these concepts relate.
On Jul 23, 2014 5:46 PM, "Ari Keränen" <[e-mail]> wrote:

> On 7/23/14 3:58 PM, Justin Uberti wrote:
>
>> The issue isn't just that you don't know when aggressive nomination has
>> ended - it's that the CONTROLLING side can't truly express its desires
>> to the CONTROLLED side, including use of some dynamic metric (e.g. RTT)
>> to choose the active candidate pair instead of PRIORITY.
>>
>> With regular nomination, the CONTROLLING side has this option, but not
>> with aggressive nomination. This is the core issue that I want to fix,
>> and I would definitely want to fix this in the media plane using
>> something like REALLY-USE-CANDIDATE, since it may change fairly quickly
>> as RTT values stabilize.
>>
>> There are other things that we can try to fix at the same time, e.g. the
>> CONTROLLED side can keep other candidate pairs warm and switch to them
>> at any time (via another REALLY-USE-CANDIDATE).
>>
>
> OK, that's an interesting case. But if you want to change candidates over
> time, this actually sounds a bit like mobility with ICE?
>
>
> Cheers,
> Ari
>
>
>