IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [rtcweb] Proposal to break the ICE impasse

Adam Roach <adam@nostrum.com> Tue, 29 January 2019 01:42 UTC

Return-Path: <adam@nostrum.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 1114D1277BB for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 28 Jan 2019 17:42:15 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.979
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.979 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, T_SPF_HELO_PERMERROR=0.01, T_SPF_PERMERROR=0.01] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=nostrum.com
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 yJbt6Ciszhey for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 28 Jan 2019 17:42:13 -0800 (PST)
Received: from nostrum.com (raven-v6.nostrum.com [IPv6:2001:470:d:1130::1]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 9684D12875B for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Mon, 28 Jan 2019 17:42:13 -0800 (PST)
Received: from MacBook-Pro.roach.at (99-152-146-228.lightspeed.dllstx.sbcglobal.net [99.152.146.228]) (authenticated bits=0) by nostrum.com (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTPSA id x0T1gBL5087344 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128 verify=NO); Mon, 28 Jan 2019 19:42:12 -0600 (CST) (envelope-from adam@nostrum.com)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=nostrum.com; s=default; t=1548726133; bh=8c08BPF4mqj3+Zpq55u4SxwQ/UFxPft08YYynzQFwYQ=; h=Subject:To:Cc:References:From:Date:In-Reply-To; b=RxJWDRyNHiM8IMe44q4UqHmC0H7l1weiqqk0w/ZVZ8edlDSBuPRX1WzbGQ4+bX0Fo HlI6U1wx8DpYaVvderMqB8cRHaA9u3ZMf6wb1MG/44UlZMLct+O6p+yjCu9Q6U0++j DD3FR3shDrn2WDOAVLZwlyrRfx675SeE7MG4CDCY=
X-Authentication-Warning: raven.nostrum.com: Host 99-152-146-228.lightspeed.dllstx.sbcglobal.net [99.152.146.228] claimed to be MacBook-Pro.roach.at
To: Eric Rescorla <ekr@rtfm.com>
Cc: RTCWeb IETF <rtcweb@ietf.org>
References: <97ed2641-8a7e-19a9-be38-a3458ca9212e@nostrum.com> <CABcZeBP9t0SgsHAuENo99D6ffKd7Mw0Xs1vzUCOzSS=WJN5z8A@mail.gmail.com> <HE1PR07MB3161B0F1D2B5AC9DA72DDFAD93950@HE1PR07MB3161.eurprd07.prod.outlook.com> <CAOJ7v-3KHi0TUDsQvG6qq-qeNGBsqLxg+NC1c+Nxvgy0ks0d0g@mail.gmail.com> <CABcZeBNL=sWFfh=zwiuib80HPsno=GzF18gU+z3DrCZTK_PquA@mail.gmail.com> <CA+9kkMDh56CeXRGNSk_r-HrLkDNT5DnYc_FguXOdeccfq=LEMA@mail.gmail.com> <CABcZeBPboLf0bLUDTyJArxsPYSnUrULArmsZ9YshQCX+rEvexA@mail.gmail.com> <937eade0-f126-472a-d990-aa4b65ea5a82@nostrum.com> <CABcZeBMXwNY9DyAg-5V2iQUBUiSvy_sE+7ShcjNGJu-WxDFx2w@mail.gmail.com>
From: Adam Roach <adam@nostrum.com>
Message-ID: <8f0f5425-96cd-3398-fb0a-c52b8820aaf2@nostrum.com>
Date: Mon, 28 Jan 2019 19:42:05 -0600
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.13; rv:60.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/60.4.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <CABcZeBMXwNY9DyAg-5V2iQUBUiSvy_sE+7ShcjNGJu-WxDFx2w@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="------------0E3CC5E571140F0112DAE5B6"
Content-Language: en-US
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/rtcweb/NsHIl8GA4nWf_U2TrTg_7-4Y7BU>
Subject: Re: [rtcweb] Proposal to break the ICE impasse
X-BeenThere: rtcweb@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
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: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/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: Tue, 29 Jan 2019 01:42:15 -0000

On 1/28/19 7:24 PM, Eric Rescorla wrote:
>
>
> On Mon, Jan 28, 2019 at 5:10 PM Adam Roach <adam@nostrum.com 
> <mailto:adam@nostrum.com>> wrote:
>
>     [as an individual]
>
>     On 1/28/19 6:55 PM, Eric Rescorla wrote:
>     > it's unnecessary complexity
>
>
>     To make sure we're not all overlooking something that is obvious
>     to you
>     -- can you describe the complexity involved here?
>
>
> Having to condition what you put in the proto line depending on the 
> candidates is more complexity than not having to do so.


Thanks. I think we're all on the same page regarding complexity.

/a

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email