[MMUSIC] 0.0.0.0 address in draft-rescorla-mmusic-ice-trickle-01
Matthew Kaufman <matthew@matthew.at> Thu, 25 October 2012 22:40 UTC
Return-Path: <matthew@matthew.at>
X-Original-To: mmusic@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: mmusic@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2F85E21F8784 for <mmusic@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 25 Oct 2012 15:40:24 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.43
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.43 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, HELO_EQ_AT=0.424, HOST_EQ_AT=0.745]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 4TcpUgzonMtN for <mmusic@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 25 Oct 2012 15:40:23 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from where.matthew.at (where.matthew.at [198.202.199.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B617B21F8727 for <mmusic@ietf.org>; Thu, 25 Oct 2012 15:40:23 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [10.80.68.50] (unknown [131.107.147.79]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by where.matthew.at (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8FA74148068 for <mmusic@ietf.org>; Thu, 25 Oct 2012 15:40:23 -0700 (PDT)
Message-ID: <5089BFD6.5070109@matthew.at>
Date: Thu, 25 Oct 2012 15:40:22 -0700
From: Matthew Kaufman <matthew@matthew.at>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.2; WOW64; rv:15.0) Gecko/20120907 Thunderbird/15.0.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: mmusic@ietf.org
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Subject: [MMUSIC] 0.0.0.0 address in draft-rescorla-mmusic-ice-trickle-01
X-BeenThere: mmusic@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: Multiparty Multimedia Session Control Working Group <mmusic.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/mmusic>, <mailto:mmusic-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/mmusic>
List-Post: <mailto:mmusic@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:mmusic-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mmusic>, <mailto:mmusic-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 25 Oct 2012 22:40:24 -0000
"In some cases, agents may choose to just send an offer that the remote party would reject as invalid unless it supports trickling. One such example would be an offer with no ICE candidates and an invalid default address (e.g. 0.0.0.0)." Is there in fact evidence that some/most/all existing SDP-parsing SIP applications will in fact reject c= (and a=rtcp) lines that contain 0.0.0.0 with an appropriate SDP-rejecting answer, rather than just answering affirmatively and attempting to send the media packets there? If we can't confirm this to be the case, this is an inappropriate "negotiation" mechanism and the spec needs to get a little more concrete about it. Matthew Kaufman
- [MMUSIC] 0.0.0.0 address in draft-rescorla-mmusic… Matthew Kaufman
- Re: [MMUSIC] 0.0.0.0 address in draft-rescorla-mm… Dan Wing
- Re: [MMUSIC] 0.0.0.0 address in draft-rescorla-mm… Bernard Aboba