Re: [rtcweb] Fwd: New Version Notification for draft-uberti-rtcweb-rfc8829bis-00.txt

Justin,

Part of the new BUNDLE syntax problem is that the offer generated during
the session is not a valid initial offer, even for the endpoints that do
support BUNDLE. There are m= lines with no candidates and no bundle-only
tags. Even if we are not going to support unbundling in 3PCC scenarios, we
should generate valid initial offers for BUNDLE-enabled endpoints.

At the very least, my suggestion would be, when a new offer is generated
after ICE restart is initiated (either due to the iceRestart option or ICE
configuration changes), to set a bundle-only tag on the bundled m= lines.

Best Regards,
_____________
Roman Shpount

On Tue, Jul 13, 2021 at 1:43 PM Justin Uberti <
juberti@alphaexplorationco.com> wrote:

> Roman,
>
> I see what you are getting at. I suppose that was one benefit of the other
> BUNDLE syntax, i.e., that all offers (not just the first) are always
> understandable by a non-BUNDLE endpoint.
>
> That said, given the adoption of BUNDLE I tend to think that 3PCC to a
> non-BUNDLE endpoint is increasingly a corner case, so it may not be worth
> going to the trouble of trying to fix the SDP syntax and allowing for
> mid-call unbundling.
>
> Note also that it is not clear to me how rtcp-mux would work in a similar
> situation, i.e., when doing 3PCC to a non-rtcp-mux endpoint.
>
> Justin
>
> On Sat, Jul 10, 2021 at 8:45 PM Roman Shpount <roman@telurix.com> wrote:
>
>> On Sat, Jul 10, 2021 at 11:35 PM Justin Uberti <justin@uberti.name>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> (To be clear, m= sections that are bundled will continue to be bundled
>>> and will not participate in the restart.)
>>>
>>
>> This is what I thought.
>>
>> How would one unbundle them if an offer needs to be generated for 3PCC
>> (like an offer in response to an empty INVITE)? There is the iceRestart
>> option for ICE to do this. Is there a need for something similar for the
>> bundle to do the same thing? Please see draft-ietf-mmusic-rfc8843bis-04
>> section 7.6 (
>> https://www.ietf.org/archive/id/draft-ietf-mmusic-rfc8843bis-04.html#section-7.6)
>> for more details.
>>
>> Please note that in the case of 3PCC an offer within an existing session
>> for one call leg would be the initial offer for another call leg. After the
>> latest change, an offer within the existing session is no longer a valid
>> initial offer.
>>
>> Thank You,
>> _____________
>> Roman Shpount
>> _______________________________________________
>> rtcweb mailing list
>> rtcweb@ietf.org
>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rtcweb
>>
>