IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [rtcweb] No-Bundle in just one peer

Justin Uberti <juberti@google.com> Mon, 11 November 2013 21:04 UTC

Return-Path: <juberti@google.com>
X-Original-To: rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3B0BF11E8103 for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 11 Nov 2013 13:04:06 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.798
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.798 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.179, BAYES_00=-2.599, FM_FORGED_GMAIL=0.622, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, NO_RELAYS=-0.001]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id wy+-1GofWQYQ for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 11 Nov 2013 13:04:05 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-vb0-x234.google.com (mail-vb0-x234.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400c:c02::234]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7E42411E80F9 for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Mon, 11 Nov 2013 13:04:05 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-vb0-f52.google.com with SMTP id f12so3586394vbg.25 for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Mon, 11 Nov 2013 13:04:05 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc:content-type; bh=/Ao+PWLqO9ZmVSlBZAuVOPr2DsMU1RJkMvHTW30HDww=; b=hBXXMR9ScZsCzmV4ryIOcFF7woes/Bt0bcktxwmANTwBvp8+40185rQmRExBtX2YGp KQutiapZUO9lztu+hGty0FCGcBhMh9dZX/2bZU0AW4Xh2qy9QXt79xf0f0LrBGdWaLm8 4VzLZh/ZRt3Evf5aMTAagX8dtKUJfWCuZtrKnh3Vm8osv1oiNlSpZmPPYL0giThiF9w4 LHOy26FZLddWaR2MrsJm7457u6eAROEWVD82OUqsKZCdeVWnrJ1GdhiapfbyCvcmjGcU G/I/waCyahv7hb3pLRVrE0P6hK75E2SobGkDD4JF4msb4st4tQnMLB7TXLipGUs+M0B3 Rl9A==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc:content-type; bh=/Ao+PWLqO9ZmVSlBZAuVOPr2DsMU1RJkMvHTW30HDww=; b=VAERdPBwE1QsrL7Qgj+hcoNbDfzcZ8sWHvcn/sRBIbRZcNS7Wk56JT3xi7mTolRlbT QIGDq/olQKzUisIYJ/TqRWCD6/9hKcsm17Ln75Fot6mfcGed/Ulk6LF83UzZ9x7ILsxL fyU1tOHXW1XbBr5vSOGKgkbnhihaJyMMFG1KmkJCLovNgcQGCUUj84njGRLkbhrdrMWa kvjn3iLWYjxvDFzHaIXyoG63L/rQJYMctk8bXdQbYWiAxuhblQxqx8bNFLU3o15Z7Ilt iwzYGokY47uVPbOdjm9dy8DuZNfjtfdVqNAHWTTTaWZ2LBxH9GDMuWPouIwMEYBgcZSz ay2Q==
X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQm9b9rAfYJwjqnS0ETnK7cXHOnKQzAsbh4LYi5bBurrbpSD7VoaCtdLJ0WDt6cirdtJ/mjZ000DwNslBlpQiU5pAgbWcPGllL3OsIDfEEeHWFEbgDHzp8X/CInO6Z4pesklmmwy51fGEpexarl7ltvJLF4BKe71QJqKZEPyTWt4D6nOgbI+7BsEdWyetw91Qj7H4t3v
X-Received: by 10.58.233.98 with SMTP id tv2mr25612719vec.11.1384203844810; Mon, 11 Nov 2013 13:04:04 -0800 (PST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.52.110.101 with HTTP; Mon, 11 Nov 2013 13:03:43 -0800 (PST)
In-Reply-To: <20131111191712.59e4e44d@lminiero>
References: <CALiegfn0mrYe2V8pWUmOCgxXWDp_8DTKJmh1Fuadu+vi1e+pOA@mail.gmail.com> <20131111191712.59e4e44d@lminiero>
From: Justin Uberti <juberti@google.com>
Date: Mon, 11 Nov 2013 13:03:43 -0800
Message-ID: <CAOJ7v-0FLKQgGKHA5soJNhAja2aNgGNi-ZouBhTaOPCkcq_e3w@mail.gmail.com>
To: Lorenzo Miniero <lorenzo@meetecho.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="089e0115ef9c77906604eaed129f"
Cc: "rtcweb@ietf.org" <rtcweb@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [rtcweb] No-Bundle in just one peer
X-BeenThere: rtcweb@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: Real-Time Communication in WEB-browsers working group list <rtcweb.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/rtcweb>, <mailto:rtcweb-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/rtcweb>
List-Post: <mailto:rtcweb@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:rtcweb-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rtcweb>, <mailto:rtcweb-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 11 Nov 2013 21:04:06 -0000

No, B cannot BUNDLE if A is not BUNDLEing. There are a number of corner
cases where things don't work right in the situation described above.


On Mon, Nov 11, 2013 at 10:17 AM, Lorenzo Miniero <lorenzo@meetecho.com>wrote:

> Il giorno Mon, 11 Nov 2013 19:12:01 +0100
> Iñaki Baz Castillo <ibc@aliax.net> ha scritto:
>
> > Hi,
> >
> > In case peer A sends a SPD without Bundle support (so it needs to
> > receive incoming tracks in separate ports and send tracks from
> > separate ports) does it aslo mean that peer B must not use Bundle? Or
> > could peer A use two local ports (no Bundle) to send/receive tracks
> > to/from a single port in peer B?
> >
> > Thanks a lot.
> >
> > --
> > Iñaki Baz Castillo
> > <ibc@aliax.net>
>
>
> Hi Iñaki,
>
> not sure what the spec currently mandates, but this works already in
> existing implementations. Peer A just needs to do the ICE and DTLS
> dance twice from its two ports towards the single port in B (twice or
> more, in case you're not muxing RTCP either).
>
> Lorenzo
> _______________________________________________
> rtcweb mailing list
> rtcweb@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rtcweb
>

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email