Re: [MMUSIC] BUNDLE DISCUSION Q6: Do we always mandate 2 Offer/Answers during session establishment?

On 09/07/2013 02:14 AM, Justin Uberti wrote:
> That's what I thought we were talking about. This has the benefit that 
> you don't need to gather STUN/TURN for the other addresses that you 
> know you are going to discard.
>
> Regarding intermediaries, I expect that even for less-well-provisioned 
> WebRTC app providers, there typically won't be any intermediaries, at 
> least none who have access to the signaling traffic.

For instance, I expect a number of applications to work on the following 
pattern:

- Set up a connection with a data channel only via some relay
- Do all subsequent offer/answer over the data channel

Given the wonderful world of DTLS, we *know* that there are no 
intermediaries.

>
>
> On Fri, Sep 6, 2013 at 1:09 PM, Martin Thomson 
> <martin.thomson@gmail.com <mailto:martin.thomson@gmail.com>> wrote:
>
>     On 6 September 2013 12:46, Christer Holmberg
>     <christer.holmberg@ericsson.com
>     <mailto:christer.holmberg@ericsson.com>> wrote:
>     > If you know that the other end supports BUNDLE, then why can't
>     you assign the shared address to each "m=" line already in the
>     FIRST Offer? Why assign unique addresses?
>
>     Exactly.  That's what I'd do.
>     _______________________________________________
>     mmusic mailing list
>     mmusic@ietf.org <mailto:mmusic@ietf.org>
>     https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mmusic
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> mmusic mailing list
> mmusic@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mmusic