Re: [rtcweb] Transport -03, bundling question (Re: Comments on draft-ietf-rtcweb-transports-02)

Martin Thomson <martin.thomson@gmail.com> Thu, 03 April 2014 20:26 UTC

Return-Path: <martin.thomson@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5813B1A011B for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 3 Apr 2014 13:26:02 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id d_w60pR7kvqi for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 3 Apr 2014 13:25:56 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-wi0-x230.google.com (mail-wi0-x230.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:400c:c05::230]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B039B1A005F for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Thu, 3 Apr 2014 13:25:55 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-wi0-f176.google.com with SMTP id r20so75373wiv.3 for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Thu, 03 Apr 2014 13:25:50 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type; bh=+sffXSWqcPHtuuP+iaXyGa4DlMVcV1A7QEypuP3gMNQ=; b=kynq+RK2oDzWwxurTxngZyCZs0+E3hwDtDc9T+UlJrNbdXbhXaOS4siiSAeMwVvLky xwaxpZ+eWqrfA157zIra7KIu68A+b4KjQo0s5XHweOz7bicQO0TbRh1P7jUlLKEte2U9 zvU7jfFpDJbt4bGQSKfYP/eMjZxjIz8aduNkjkqmCbT+G0CUDelDR7U6DkE+98ryMy0z n8bYOq7QfAH60WvAMqfrctKwgX0LH9772xK8tVjdhosriZSKA4WeWMaPBZUIZxlNe5XZ q6oZ1RL67z7lxkz+VbddICNeKA7/CDUNJemNUnbsYX04j6VKw/EugzVeFepSKSYKf623 vvYQ==
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.180.89.211 with SMTP id bq19mr40694221wib.58.1396556750916; Thu, 03 Apr 2014 13:25:50 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.227.147.10 with HTTP; Thu, 3 Apr 2014 13:25:50 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <CAOW+2dsX4DkUTSdyVKXbHtgbVbrmS3+KTDiaYF7=8FORQ3Ri_w@mail.gmail.com>
References: <5304829E.20809@ericsson.com> <5304FC27.807@alvestrand.no> <530C74A1.3000203@ericsson.com> <5338829B.3020505@alvestrand.no> <5339385D.6070006@ericsson.com> <53397036.5050104@alvestrand.no> <56C2F665D49E0341B9DF5938005ACDF82B7921@DEMUMBX005.nsn-intra.net> <533984DD.2020804@alvestrand.no> <CAOW+2dsX4DkUTSdyVKXbHtgbVbrmS3+KTDiaYF7=8FORQ3Ri_w@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 3 Apr 2014 13:25:50 -0700
Message-ID: <CABkgnnWzh8Us=e-MhEZg=8Psy7=-BqLAt-UWASBPjuTAku9bgw@mail.gmail.com>
From: Martin Thomson <martin.thomson@gmail.com>
To: Bernard Aboba <bernard.aboba@gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/rtcweb/HOklkV1WPJMBh08FvtsCsqL5cd8
Cc: "rtcweb@ietf.org" <rtcweb@ietf.org>, Harald Alvestrand <hta@google.com>
Subject: Re: [rtcweb] Transport -03, bundling question (Re: Comments on draft-ietf-rtcweb-transports-02)
X-BeenThere: rtcweb@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
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, 03 Apr 2014 20:26:02 -0000

On 3 April 2014 12:13, Bernard Aboba <bernard.aboba@gmail.com> wrote:
> "My memory was faulty; I had thought that the same conclusion had applied
> for TCP ICE candidates as for TURN ICE candidates. Version -04 will have
> this fixed."
>
> [BA]  My memory was similarly faulty. But assuming the problem is with my
> memory as opposed to the minutes, the decision to require support for ICE
> TCP brings to mind other questions such as:

That makes three with faulty memories.  But perhaps that's my
prejudice at play.  The marginal benefit remains...tiny relative to
the cost.