Re: [rtcweb] Same location media

Roman Shpount <roman@telurix.com> Thu, 20 October 2011 16:45 UTC

Return-Path: <roman@telurix.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 05B6221F8C5B for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 20 Oct 2011 09:45:29 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.873
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.873 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.103, BAYES_00=-2.599, FM_FORGED_GMAIL=0.622, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1]
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 Its5ihxqDlU5 for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 20 Oct 2011 09:45:28 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-gx0-f172.google.com (mail-gx0-f172.google.com [209.85.161.172]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 79B0E21F8BE4 for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Thu, 20 Oct 2011 09:45:28 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by ggnv1 with SMTP id v1so3573971ggn.31 for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Thu, 20 Oct 2011 09:45:27 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.68.73.103 with SMTP id k7mr11809010pbv.30.1319129127547; Thu, 20 Oct 2011 09:45:27 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-pz0-f50.google.com (mail-pz0-f50.google.com [209.85.210.50]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id w4sm20573527pbf.6.2011.10.20.09.45.24 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=OTHER); Thu, 20 Oct 2011 09:45:26 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by pzk34 with SMTP id 34so7767364pzk.9 for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Thu, 20 Oct 2011 09:45:23 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.68.23.6 with SMTP id i6mr21285032pbf.13.1319129123745; Thu, 20 Oct 2011 09:45:23 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.68.47.40 with HTTP; Thu, 20 Oct 2011 09:45:23 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <BLU152-W274DC7DC92EF49307BC57D93EB0@phx.gbl>
References: <CAD5OKxuJi_VS9fRc4P6GN-StWzMhMHAQ2MyO8zJVsMfEeQRftg@mail.gmail.com> <BLU152-W274DC7DC92EF49307BC57D93EB0@phx.gbl>
Date: Thu, 20 Oct 2011 12:45:23 -0400
Message-ID: <CAD5OKxuooQzhmyHFi87XNPwiNqB7ohzhcbOWEsvCn-Zkshc9kQ@mail.gmail.com>
From: Roman Shpount <roman@telurix.com>
To: Bernard Aboba <bernard_aboba@hotmail.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="bcaec5216223d56fe004afbdae64"
Cc: rtcweb@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [rtcweb] Same location media
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, 20 Oct 2011 16:45:29 -0000

On Thu, Oct 20, 2011 at 12:41 PM, Bernard Aboba
<bernard_aboba@hotmail.com>wrote:

> One of the requirements in the use case document is the ability to work
> across firewalls that do not permit UDP.  In practice, this constraint is
> encountered surprisingly often (as much as 15-25% of the time, in enterprise
> scenarios).   The implication is that ICE will require a fallback, such as
> sending media over HTTP.   In a fallback situation, requiring ICE would be
> silly, since it has typically failed in order for fallback to be
> considered.
>

Technically speaking, if TURN server relay address is used, connectivity
between the RTC client and TURN server can be TCP (or TLS). So, ICE check
would be delivered to the RTC client via TCP tunnel.
_____________
Roman Shpount