Re: [MMUSIC] ice-options attribute: session- and media-level?

+1

Regards,

Christer

From: mmusic <mmusic-bounces@ietf.org<mailto:mmusic-bounces@ietf.org>> on behalf of Roman Shpount <roman@telurix.com<mailto:roman@telurix.com>>
Date: Monday 23 April 2018 at 20:03
To: "marc@petit-huguenin.org<mailto:marc@petit-huguenin.org>" <marc@petit-huguenin.org<mailto:marc@petit-huguenin.org>>
Cc: "mmusic@ietf.org<mailto:mmusic@ietf.org>" <mmusic@ietf.org<mailto:mmusic@ietf.org>>
Subject: Re: [MMUSIC] ice-options attribute: session- and media-level?

Hi All,

I would prefer disaggregated media to be handled separately and keep ice-options a session level attribute.. Dealing with disaggregated media is a much bigger issue then just adjusting ice-options. For instance, why ice-options are handled there and ice-lite is excluded? I think ice-lite is potentially as big of the problem when aggregating media from several sources. Also, I we sure that making singe ICE agent dealing with two independent ICE agents does not have any issues? I do not think this was examined in sufficient detail.

Furthermore, it is possible to define per ICE candidate specific parameters using ICE candidate extension attributes. I think it would be cleaner to define things which are specific to only some candidates using this mechanism vs medial level ice-options.

Regards,

_____________
Roman Shpount

On Mon, Apr 23, 2018 at 12:45 PM, Marc Petit-Huguenin <marc@petit-huguenin.org<mailto:marc@petit-huguenin.org>> wrote:
This was done as a consequence of merging this draft in ice-bis:

https://www.ietf.org/archive/id/draft-petithuguenin-mmusic-ice-attributes-level-04.txt

There is probably discussions that can be found in the minutes of IETF meetings around that time when the WG agreed to that modification.

On 04/20/2018 11:09 PM, Suhas Nandakumar wrote:
> I am fine with considering ice-options has session level too. I wonder if
> Marc can chime in on considering it as  media level in the ice-sip-sdp.
>
> On Fri, Apr 20, 2018 at 12:07 PM, Peter Saint-Andre <stpeter@mozilla.com<mailto:stpeter@mozilla.com>>
> wrote:
>
>> On 4/20/18 12:37 PM, Roman Shpount wrote:
>>> Hi All,
>>>
>>> I do not think ice-options was ever used as a media level attribute.
>>> Only two ice-options defined in IANA registry
>>> (https://www.iana.org/assignments/ice/ice.xhtml) are ice2 and  rtp+ecn,
>>> which are both session level.
>>>
>>> Furthermore, RFC 5245 section 15.5
>>> (https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc5245#section-15.5,) defined that
>>> ice-options attribute is session level only. Thus, ice-options should be
>>> kept session level for backwards compatibility.
>>>
>>> If something more granular then session is needed, I think it should go
>>> into candidate extension attribute, not into media level ice-options.
>>>
>>> Bottom line, I think ice-options should be a a session level only
>> attribute.
>>
>> Agreed.
>>
>> In the Trickle ICE spec, we also limited the `trickle` option to session
>> level only.
>>
>> Peter
>>
>>

--
Marc Petit-Huguenin
Email: marc@petit-huguenin.org<mailto:marc@petit-huguenin.org>
Blog: https://marc.petit-huguenin.org
Profile: https://www.linkedin.com/in/petithug

_______________________________________________
mmusic mailing list
mmusic@ietf.org<mailto:mmusic@ietf.org>
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mmusic