Re: [rtcweb] Why is required to have local streams before running ICE gathering? (another SDP limitation?)

Iñaki Baz Castillo <ibc@aliax.net> Mon, 17 June 2013 16:53 UTC

Return-Path: <ibc@aliax.net>
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 9FBA621F9D4B for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 17 Jun 2013 09:53:30 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.677
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.677 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, FM_FORGED_GMAIL=0.622, MIME_8BIT_HEADER=0.3, 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 bnl5zmE2Npsa for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 17 Jun 2013 09:53:26 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-qe0-f53.google.com (mail-qe0-f53.google.com [209.85.128.53]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 00A8A21F9D48 for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Mon, 17 Jun 2013 09:53:25 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-qe0-f53.google.com with SMTP id 1so1807957qee.26 for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Mon, 17 Jun 2013 09:53:25 -0700 (PDT)
X-Google-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:content-transfer-encoding:x-gm-message-state; bh=uNe+j+isdNa9j7NhK11+pfaWiq1SdgldD/y5aRBToC4=; b=A9BrV7x7u7E0JGtYctkR11nwp57e1mySMDcCFtOLVVSqNcutqyC042LsrZCioSmVOx vRFwF7mJd/ImmK0yD+rO/k0lknlGdQxAhsIMoi6SNAPpmje5sd+M31JTgU7yl69wCho8 U1ieHoTxKkjkXo9Xhy1ErOocg15RZPeXKtExltZfOnzyK1Yyh2u+KX6tqjgPf7MtTrgj zt3T9MwjTPvdzLoL+EVCQS8w8YfYaeKueKnsnb3fR7LXbdZnFS/DhlC4w3jX/E/Vltg5 Y2Yq+CD168jfgYCs+Jd7dJlXSG+vpwPIMQ0nXbTdE1gRJv5CELeMRwkrdDbd440Adl5X FACQ==
X-Received: by 10.49.35.233 with SMTP id l9mr21717749qej.23.1371488005361; Mon, 17 Jun 2013 09:53:25 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.49.67.65 with HTTP; Mon, 17 Jun 2013 09:53:05 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <CFB23B7B-0ED6-4EC6-AE0B-98041F04037A@genesyslab.com>
References: <CALiegf=ABGSR+CRM-GiMJ-Vmk29-FAyCNgWSFfeneB4V6ObkYQ@mail.gmail.com> <CABcZeBPFTOi6S4YXUSPTo1pGvT=zM9_bivi9Q7MAg5wSrATfXQ@mail.gmail.com> <CABcZeBM6NN2jm9s+mrNj759AiQu31R8QdRgkr65gKxOFm0jvjw@mail.gmail.com> <CALiegfmjvoMgcVRnrsfg4AMdpguDW1X-gmzOKiHZenUGheA7Aw@mail.gmail.com> <CABcZeBOEsgWUA5w4wCAtD_K5YhEdDXR2GvqhocX=BExJCUZn9w@mail.gmail.com> <CFB23B7B-0ED6-4EC6-AE0B-98041F04037A@genesyslab.com>
From: =?UTF-8?Q?I=C3=B1aki_Baz_Castillo?= <ibc@aliax.net>
Date: Mon, 17 Jun 2013 18:53:05 +0200
Message-ID: <CALiegfmReocu7djenY6bQznLRO-YbgeZr5eLczhePBAsv=055A@mail.gmail.com>
To: Jim Barnett <Jim.Barnett@genesyslab.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQlvpL5KE0eGAgs9LzC8kRb6j7X78fSD1ZF0hjcd9bOndD+xSwDTAQ1aFGkOVOaz+YF85GXj
Cc: "rtcweb@ietf.org" <rtcweb@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [rtcweb] Why is required to have local streams before running ICE gathering? (another SDP limitation?)
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, 17 Jun 2013 16:53:31 -0000

Thanks to both, it seems what we need for implementing the desired feature.


2013/6/14 Jim Barnett <Jim.Barnett@genesyslab.com>om>:
> You can call updateICE at any point.  I also recall us agreeing to let you specify the number of candidates, but it's not in the spec. If it gets added to updateICE then you would be able to specify the number of candidates before setLocal.
>
> On Jun 14, 2013, at 10:01 AM, "Eric Rescorla" <ekr@rtfm.com<mailto:ekr@rtfm.com>> wrote:
>
>
>
>
> On Fri, Jun 14, 2013 at 4:53 AM, Iñaki Baz Castillo <ibc@aliax.net<mailto:ibc@aliax.net>> wrote:
> 2013/6/13 Eric Rescorla <ekr@rtfm.com<mailto:ekr@rtfm.com>>:
>>> 1. There is agreement that there should be a mechanism to pre-specify
>>> the size of a candidate pool to gather, though I just glanced in the spec
>>> and I didn't see it. (May have missed it though).
>>
>>
>> I see that there still is some (not quite up to date) text here:
>>
>> Create an ICE Agent as defined in [ICE] and let connection's
>> RTCPeerConnection ICE Agent be that ICE Agent and provide it the STUN and
>> TURN servers from the configuration array. The ICE Agent will proceed with
>> gathering as soon as the IceTransports constraint is not set to "none". At
>> this point the ICE Agent does not know how many ICE components it needs (and
>> hence the number of candidates to gather), but it can make a reasonable
>> assumption such as 2. As the RTCPeerConnection object gets more information,
>> the ICE Agent can adjust the number of components.
>
>
> Hi Eric, thanks a lot for the information you provide.
>
> Is it feasible with the current API to ask for N ICE candidates prior
> to having the local SDP set as local descriptor in the PeerConnection?
>
>
> That has been discussed (and I thought agreed upon) but I don't see
> it in the spec.
>
> -Ekr
>
> _______________________________________________
> rtcweb mailing list
> rtcweb@ietf.org<mailto:rtcweb@ietf.org>
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rtcweb
>



-- 
Iñaki Baz Castillo
<ibc@aliax.net>