Re: [MMUSIC] Trickle ICE for SIP Questions

"Parthasarathi R" <> Thu, 25 July 2013 15:55 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id BF55821F9B19 for <>; Thu, 25 Jul 2013 08:55:20 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.264
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.264 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.000, BAYES_00=-2.599, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, IP_NOT_FRIENDLY=0.334]
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id NcPPOBwCzBaV for <>; Thu, 25 Jul 2013 08:55:16 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 916C121F9AAB for <>; Thu, 25 Jul 2013 08:55:16 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from userPC (unknown []) (Authenticated sender: by (Postfix) with ESMTPA id 7A18619082CF; Thu, 25 Jul 2013 15:55:09 +0000 (GMT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=20120823; t=1374767716; bh=DI6N6uMsJtV0BIDojWJC8dpIRfd5HDAcWGRguzOc/YA=; h=From:To:Cc:References:In-Reply-To:Subject:Date:Message-ID: MIME-Version:Content-Type; b=lSOGT5gxH5z8Pv+cxJPDktEVGBc1ij4WXrqahfQhk37Lt5ZNMJlA1jvyuGFhDfGti ORz7+zkMaC/DrPHtOig3HepSsjriULqdseeYksBFRtchHWN+7Tsrog+zJ4jvVsKE1G Hes5V2pvws1W6wAhwekHCQsTKpjXzg8HC/jcr5us=
From: Parthasarathi R <>
To: 'Christer Holmberg' <>, "'Cullen Jennings (fluffy)'" <>, "'Vijaya Mandava (vimandav)'" <>
References: <>, <> <>
In-Reply-To: <>
Date: Thu, 25 Jul 2013 21:25:04 +0530
Message-ID: <00df01ce894f$58a3baf0$09eb30d0$>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_00E0_01CE897D.725BF6F0"
X-Mailer: Microsoft Office Outlook 12.0
Content-Language: en-us
X-CTCH-RefID: str=0001.0A0C0208.51F14A64.0078, ss=1, re=0.000, recu=0.000, reip=0.000, cl=1, cld=1, fgs=0
X-CTCH-VOD: Unknown
X-CTCH-Spam: Unknown
X-CTCH-Score: 0.000
X-CTCH-Flags: 0
X-CTCH-ScoreCust: 0.000
X-CTCH-SenderID-TotalMessages: 1
X-CTCH-SenderID-TotalSpam: 0
X-CTCH-SenderID-TotalSuspected: 0
X-CTCH-SenderID-TotalBulk: 0
X-CTCH-SenderID-TotalConfirmed: 0
X-CTCH-SenderID-TotalRecipients: 0
X-CTCH-SenderID-TotalVirus: 0
X-CTCH-SenderID-BlueWhiteFlag: 0
X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.72 on
Cc: 'Alan Johnston' <>, 'MMUSIC IETF WG' <>
Subject: Re: [MMUSIC] Trickle ICE for SIP Questions
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: Multiparty Multimedia Session Control Working Group <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 25 Jul 2013 15:55:20 -0000

Hi Christer,


The only way to identify whether it is same from UAS is to look into contact
header/IP address of the SIP response. In this situation, contact header and
IP address of SIP response is same all for "to-tag".


My concern is w.r.t INFO with SDP handling. I have written in the different





From: [] On Behalf Of
Christer Holmberg
Sent: Thursday, July 25, 2013 2:05 AM
To: Cullen Jennings (fluffy); Vijaya Mandava (vimandav)
Cc: Alan Johnston; MMUSIC IETF WG
Subject: Re: [MMUSIC] Trickle ICE for SIP Questions




Wouldn't the UAC need to know that the 180s come from the same UAS?






Sent from Windows using TouchDown (

-----Original Message-----
From: Cullen Jennings (fluffy) []
To: Vijaya Mandava (vimandav) []
CC: Alan Johnston []; MMUSIC IETF WG
Subject: Re: [MMUSIC] Trickle ICE for SIP Questions

On Jul 24, 2013, at 12:22 PM, Vijaya Mandava (vimandav) <>

> 180 with different to-tag would mean call is forked.
> If uac side do not support call forking, then we cannot use this 180
> response to collect trickled candidates.

If it is a UAC, it supports this so I don't see the problem.

mmusic mailing list