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

[Emil Ivov <[e-mail]>]

On Thu, Jul 24, 2014 at 10:43 AM, Iñaki Baz Castillo <[e-mail]> wrote:
> 2014-07-24 16:20 GMT+02:00 Emil Ivov <[e-mail]>:
>> USE-CANDIDATE-CONFIRMATION (or whatever name we want) sounds like the
>> most unambiguous and easy to implement option.
>>
>> I don't think priorities should play a role at this stage, just as
>> they don't with regular nomination.
>
> Just wondering:
>
> What about re-sending the chosen ICE Request but with a higher
> PRIORITY at that point? I mean:
>
>   Req1 (USE-CANDIDATE, PRIORITY: 1234)  -->
>   Req2 (USE-CANDIDATE, PRIORITY: 2345)  -->
>   (let's choose the first one)
>   Req1 (USE-CANDIDATE, PRIORITY: 9999)  -->
>
> For sure you have already thought about this and it is invalid, just
> wondering if I miss something. :)

Well, if you are going to resend it at all then you don't even need to
change priority. The simple fact that you are re-confirming it should
be enough of an indication. That's actually the second option I was
referring to in my previous mail and it would work but I just find it
inconvenient when analysing wireshark traces (i.e., looking for
USE-CANDIDATE-CONFIRMATION is easier than trying to count the number
of USE-CANDIDATEs for a specific pair and then trying to distinguish
retransmissions from new transactions).

Emil


-- 
https://jitsi.org