Re: [rtcweb] Requiring ICE for RTC calls

Cullen Jennings <> Wed, 28 September 2011 19:46 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id F3C231F0CDA for <>; Wed, 28 Sep 2011 12:46:12 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -103.051
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-103.051 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.452, BAYES_00=-2.599, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id csOf+imWGE00 for <>; Wed, 28 Sep 2011 12:46:12 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8A3E11F0CD3 for <>; Wed, 28 Sep 2011 12:46:12 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple;;; l=1744; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1317239342; x=1318448942; h=subject:mime-version:from:in-reply-to:date:cc: content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references:to; bh=Vb2GTHWjUi+27gJo/pc5GH4mRRYYlG2fvEUR1L/SoOE=; b=gK3cGxEckYleCJuuBPMKcN6ma/FRF7LG4nB2n9recKcknHnxNFnDHl8U qNpTZJmxVYRNUFsRHTIeYVwmMCp/dLxcT3tu/vVfvsf0QRkfy9Smqk8Qh AHfEJuH2e5fOfSPR0Xq+7Tbdybw2HCvpHqPsskvSimDfN08vw5Y+tVePI M=;
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: Av0EAF95g06rRDoG/2dsb2JhbABCqAd4gVMBAQEBAgESASc/EAsYLlcGExsHh1aZewGeJoYrYQSHcotjhSKMMg
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.68,456,1312156800"; d="scan'208";a="4851746"
Received: from ([]) by with ESMTP; 28 Sep 2011 19:49:01 +0000
Received: from [] ( []) by (8.14.3/8.14.3) with ESMTP id p8SJn03c028342; Wed, 28 Sep 2011 19:49:00 GMT
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1084)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
From: Cullen Jennings <>
In-Reply-To: <>
Date: Wed, 28 Sep 2011 13:49:00 -0600
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <>
References: <> <> <> <> <> <> <> <> <> <> <> <> <>
To: Roman Shpount <>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1084)
Cc: Randell Jesup <>,
Subject: Re: [rtcweb] Requiring ICE for RTC calls
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: Real-Time Communication in WEB-browsers working group list <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 28 Sep 2011 19:46:13 -0000

On Sep 28, 2011, at 1:44 PM, Roman Shpount wrote:

> On Wed, Sep 28, 2011 at 1:04 PM, Cullen Jennings <> wrote:
> I agree with you point that the majority of deployed phones don't support ICE. But so what, what do you propose to do. One thing that is not going to happen is browser vendors do something which makes browsers such a security threat that the browsers are banned from every corporate network. Solutions like CORS solve the problem but short of something like that, I don't see browser vendors deciding that remove same origin policy is a good idea.
> As I wrote before, you can use RTC not only in the desktop browser but also in the desktop phone. It is not unreasonable to use the same CPU platform being used in mobile phones and build a desk IP phone which primarily runs the web browser to control its screen and uses RTC to setup voice/video calls. This phone can be a much better and more extendable standard platform for building UC solutions then most of the current SIP phones. The problem is if standard requires ICE/SRTP this phone will not be able to work with most of the current enterprise phones. Once again, since this can be considered a marginal use case, we don't need to cover it in the standard and the phone vendor can just ignore that ICE requirement since it knows that the phone is located in the fully controlled network.
> _____________
> Roman Shpount

Sure, in that sort of case, I'm sure lots of the code being open sourced for RTCweb will will be reused to build phones and modified in ways like you suggest - but as you say, that's outside the scope of what we want to solve here.