Re: [rtcweb] Filling in details on "trickle ICE"

Emil Ivov <emcho@jitsi.org> Thu, 18 October 2012 13:58 UTC

Return-Path: <emil@sip-communicator.org>
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 0C80021F8780 for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 18 Oct 2012 06:58:10 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -3.249
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.249 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, HELO_EQ_FR=0.35, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1]
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 FmnZe722fdyU for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 18 Oct 2012 06:58:09 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-we0-f172.google.com (mail-we0-f172.google.com [74.125.82.172]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2C53A21F877F for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Thu, 18 Oct 2012 06:58:08 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-we0-f172.google.com with SMTP id u46so5631753wey.31 for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Thu, 18 Oct 2012 06:58:07 -0700 (PDT)
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=20120113; h=message-id:date:from:organization:user-agent:mime-version:to:cc :subject:references:in-reply-to:content-type :content-transfer-encoding:x-gm-message-state; bh=JIVl6Oypq85mYH6asWRKnj80F1yvZcBxybfEfpoCwmQ=; b=XuSZPy/NTv6aIPuzockZv67jUArZymQuMGXsRiqv/VpzAqwZe/paogEsiSLJfKFKK+ 0BAWnHGf+zCFsZCFkbrjt2b+DTHryMPSq6cQL3tFgmRBAdxu2W5B/kZIQFwWA6zBpiUO k+G/1sykp7vVg4GTIGwPae1x88tXOL8jVPWIVGhvP7J/fGYrvIfCwswhBgKBx8n+TCc/ +Ws+CnfF0S+fYlsAZ496q2WqF2W0T3rIkn+abjhtdCT3dptDQMKz3XQp7CIVvUPjD6F1 b2MMye0KL8r5BwbMxB+4cAUe83bwtPd6uIcQntiUXCu4r4rhKehYHO4d6UVxxakYIYkk Jaow==
Received: by 10.180.79.34 with SMTP id g2mr11557793wix.19.1350568687542; Thu, 18 Oct 2012 06:58:07 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from pastropnet.u-strasbg.fr (pastropnet.u-strasbg.fr. [130.79.90.87]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id q7sm33843750wiy.11.2012.10.18.06.58.05 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=OTHER); Thu, 18 Oct 2012 06:58:05 -0700 (PDT)
Message-ID: <50800AEC.2070400@jitsi.org>
Date: Thu, 18 Oct 2012 15:58:04 +0200
From: Emil Ivov <emcho@jitsi.org>
Organization: Jitsi
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.8; rv:15.0) Gecko/20120907 Thunderbird/15.0.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Christer Holmberg <christer.holmberg@ericsson.com>
References: <CABcZeBMzgAs=hK38hCjS7t6yLjkTydS2TQUb8R3rBbRKGakVdQ@mail.gmail.com> <50508ED7.9080805@ericsson.com> <505B6A7E.6010309@jitsi.org> <CAOJ7v-00BAp8M0_+FJGuXqAdXQ=e=MRN_L_6_CmkQWX-Gy5JAg@mail.gmail.com> <AE1A6B5FD507DC4FB3C5166F3A05A484160ED5CD@tk5ex14mbxc272.redmond.corp.microsoft.com> <7594FB04B1934943A5C02806D1A2204B018842@ESESSMB209.ericsson.se> <507FD1C8.8000100@jitsi.org> <7594FB04B1934943A5C02806D1A2204B018C70@ESESSMB209.ericsson.se> <507FF42E.5070106@jitsi.org> <7594FB04B1934943A5C02806D1A2204B018D1F@ESESSMB209.ericsson.se> <507FF688.2010704@jitsi.org> <7594FB04B1934943A5C02806D1A2204B018D4B@ESESSMB209.ericsson.se> <507FFBB5.4080904@jitsi.org> <7594FB04B1934943A5C02806D1A2204B018DA9@ESESSMB209.ericsson.se>
In-Reply-To: <7594FB04B1934943A5C02806D1A2204B018DA9@ESESSMB209.ericsson.se>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQnFA4OVb86TJIOZmeVgZkWeHql9ZfWpAkvpG2BBhS/ZwQ0YEU7/sYOsa3gs9MhPN6+dpL2R
Cc: "rtcweb@ietf.org" <rtcweb@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [rtcweb] Filling in details on "trickle ICE"
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: Thu, 18 Oct 2012 13:58:10 -0000

Hey Christer,

On 18.10.12, 15:03, Christer Holmberg wrote:
> Hi,
> 
>>>>>>>>> IF we are going to relax 3264 (I really hope we are NOT), it 
>>>>>>>>> needs to be clearly described somewhere. We cannot have a number 
>>>>>>>>> of I-Ds doing it "on the run"...
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I don't see how trickle ICE would require any changes to the O/A 
>>>>>>>> model. Candidate trickling semantics are completely separate from 
>>>>>>>> those in 3264.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Yes, the 3264 offer may, in some cases, contain a first batch of 
>>>>>>>> candidates and the the 3264 may have to be delayed until ICE 
>>>>>>>> processing yields valid pairs for every component but that's 
>>>>>>>> about it.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Am I missing something?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I guess the question was whether one, after the first batch of 
>>>>>>> candidates have been sent in an offer, should be allowed to send 
>>>>>>> the second batch in a new offer - before an answer to the previous 
>>>>>>> offer has been received. That would be against 3264.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> It would indeed but I am not sure why we would think of additional 
>>>>>> candidate drops as offers at all. They are just independent 
>>>>>> signalling and are only loosely related to the 3264 semantics.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Of course with SIP we would have a problem caused by the fact that 
>>>>>> additional in-dialog signalling is blocked by the 3264 answer.
>>>>>> However, that's specific to SIP and will probably be best served 
>>>>>> with a SIP specific solution (e.g. UPDATEs or forcing early 
>>>>>> answers, or something else).
>>>>>
>>>>> It is sure that SIP may add its own limitations, but the general O/A 
>>>>> is generic.
>>>>
>>>> Sure, and we agree that the general O/A need not be used for trickle ICE, right?
>>>
>>> Well, I think general O/A SHALL be used - not only for trickle ICE,
>>
>> But why? What do we get from trickling via offers and answers other than problems?
>>
>> Or did you mean that
>>
>>> but also for JSEP :)
>>>
>>> (Vanilla ICE is also using general O/A)
>>
>> Not really. At least not always. ICE is quite nicely separated from the media O/A in XMPP.
>>
>> Both are indeed stuffed together for SIP by 5245 but that's just a design choice that we don't need to stick with. At least I don't see why we would.
> 
> I was thinking about 5245, and JSEP, both with use 3264.
> 
> You are right that other protocols (e.g. XMPP) also can use ICE. However, you do use "Offer" and "Answer" terminology in your draft, and at least I associate that with 3264...

Yes, but I already agreed that the term was somewhat abused and we need
to review that. We may probably just switch to calling them ICE
initiation request/response ... or something along those lines.

We will do this in the 01 version which should be coming later this week.

Cheers,
Emil

-- 
https://jitsi.org