Re: [rtcweb] New version of use-case draft uploaded

[Magnus Westerlund <[e-mail]>]

Hi Partha,

See inline

On 2014-02-08 10:12, Parthasarathi R wrote:
> Hi Stefan,
> 
> <snip>
>> Yes, I did that change (TURN -> ICE). My understanding was that ICE is
>> what is used/mandated (and it in turn makes use of STUN and TURN).
>>
> </snip>
> 
> ICE is mandated in RTCWeb but I disagree to your assumption that ICE in turn
> makes use of TURN. My concern is that The requirement document is misleading
> about TURN requirements. ICE-TCP avoids TURN server as the middle-box in the
> network. ICE-TCP is host candidate whereas TURN is relay candidate and as
> per ICE candidate selection, host candidate is preferred over relay
> candidates. 

I will agree that the note as currently worded is not completely
accurate and clear. Based on the text in the preceding section, it makes
sense to note that ICE using STUN and TURN is not the only solution
including additional ICE modes or relay services. I request the authors
propose a new formulation of the note.

> 
> In case of WebRTC servers (like conference)/gateway implementation, WebRTC
> server is never going to be behind firewall, ICE-TCP serve the purpose and
> there is no need of TURN server as a middle-box in the network. So, Could
> you please correct the F31, F32 requirement text in the next revision of the
> draft.
>   

This is a request to change two requirements. I have not seen a clear
consensus on this change. Thus, the change is rejected for now.

>From my perspective your proposal for ICE-TCP based solution is a choice
to fulfill F2 and F29, not F31 and F32. Thus, I don't see an issue for
F31 and F32 being STUN and TURN specific.

Is really the current formulations in the requirement documents a hinder
against the WG considering an ICE-TCP based traversal addition? I don't
see it, and if you do, can you please be clearer in your explanation
what the issue is? If not, I think your time is better spent working on
building a clear motivation why ICE-TCP is needed to help establish a WG
consensus on this.

Cheers

Magnus Westerlund
(As co-chair)

----------------------------------------------------------------------
Services, Media and Network features, Ericsson Research EAB/TXM
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Ericsson AB                 | Phone  [phone]
Färögatan 6                 | Mobile [phone]
SE-164 80 Stockholm, Sweden | mailto: [e-mail]
----------------------------------------------------------------------