[MMUSIC] bundle-11: Bundle Address Synchronization (BAS)

["Stach, Thomas" <[e-mail]>]

Christer, Cullen, Harald, all

Bundle Address Synchronization (BAS) is motivated by almost the same arguments that led to the ICE updated offer/answer in 5245.

Now, at IETF 90 the updated offer/answer procedures for ICE were discussed and the consensus was to change the existing behavior to:
" you do it (i.e. the updated offer/answer) or don't do it, but you indicate in the o/a if you're going to do it. Basically want to have option to never do the updated O/A exchange, with an indication in the signaling that you will not be doing it. Of course can always initiate a new O/A exchange whenever you want to."

I think the same discussion and obviously  its result also applies to BUNDLE and BAS.
Otherwise, if you use BUNDLE together with ICE, the updated offer/answer cycle is back.
If the WG agrees, this would require some additional parameter/attribute in the offer that indicates if BAS will be performed or not.

Some common approach for the updated offer/answer issue might also be justified.
An obvious thought  would be if re-using the same "thing" for ICE and BUNDLE would be appropriate.
... and for CapNeg albeit its lack of deployment
Thoughts

Regards
Thomas