Re: [MMUSIC] Trickle ICE comments [Re: Trickle ICE update and a new SIP usage draft.]

On Thu, Feb 7, 2013 at 11:53 AM, Matthew Kaufman <matthew@matthew.at> wrote:
> On 2/7/2013 8:18 AM, Ted Hardie wrote:
>>
>>
>> It would terminate it, but not prematurely.  The client sends
>> a=end-of-candidates whenever it's done sending candidates; it just
>> allows you to send that indicator if you already had the full list on
>> the first use.  So if it did the blocking version of candidate
>> gathering, it sends that as the indicator that it is done.
>
>
> Isn't part of the point of trickle-ICE that you potentially are never done
> sending candidates? (Interface and connectivity changes and the like,
> avoiding a complete session restart by testing and switching to new
> candidates on the fly)

You could use it that way, but it supports modes that allow you to
claim you are done.  The "send host candidates first, then trickle
server reflexive and call it done" is one called out in the draft.
Since you can claim you are done, getting the semantics of vanilla ICE
seems easy enough.

Just my two cents,

Ted

>
> Matthew Kaufman
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> mmusic mailing list
> mmusic@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mmusic