IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [rtcweb] I-D Action: draft-muthu-behave-consent-freshness-03.txt - ICE lite?

"Muthu Arul Mozhi Perumal (mperumal)" <mperumal@cisco.com> Thu, 28 February 2013 17:47 UTC

Return-Path: <mperumal@cisco.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 CDBBD21F8C22 for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 28 Feb 2013 09:47:37 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -10.599
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-10.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.000, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-8]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id dTg1zOiDW863 for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 28 Feb 2013 09:47:37 -0800 (PST)
Received: from rcdn-iport-9.cisco.com (rcdn-iport-9.cisco.com [173.37.86.80]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4338821F8C1A for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Thu, 28 Feb 2013 09:47:37 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=@cisco.com; l=1816; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1362073657; x=1363283257; h=from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:references: in-reply-to:content-transfer-encoding:mime-version; bh=ECMIzt4rVgNjuCJX2JOQOgfEI2Kmfjk7Z81LC5ZEfZY=; b=eHJxVY4H03dFNWzowHfw5tH0MASwH5VtNUoElrunojUl9yb8bf1IKCGh DBJ5TwDjpdiz8IRwbmbz3UCajKTdEXCczDt+WdlteY7ptrGbVqykZhkU3 d13moyOAhZKEdRxe3ugWEVPqCImdNsvJGcuK3/lcGLL5sZHQLc8J3jJP/ o=;
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: AgMFALeWL1GtJXG8/2dsb2JhbABFhk+7XQ1vFnOCHwEBAQQjEUUMBAIBCBEEAQEDAgYdAwICAh8RFAEICAIEAQ0FCId5Aw+vLYh6DYkLgSOLGYInJgsHBoInMmEDlGSNMIUXgVKBNoIn
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.84,755,1355097600"; d="scan'208";a="179320259"
Received: from rcdn-core2-1.cisco.com ([173.37.113.188]) by rcdn-iport-9.cisco.com with ESMTP; 28 Feb 2013 17:47:36 +0000
Received: from xhc-rcd-x14.cisco.com (xhc-rcd-x14.cisco.com [173.37.183.88]) by rcdn-core2-1.cisco.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id r1SHlacJ023645 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=FAIL); Thu, 28 Feb 2013 17:47:36 GMT
Received: from xmb-rcd-x02.cisco.com ([169.254.4.47]) by xhc-rcd-x14.cisco.com ([173.37.183.88]) with mapi id 14.02.0318.004; Thu, 28 Feb 2013 11:47:36 -0600
From: "Muthu Arul Mozhi Perumal (mperumal)" <mperumal@cisco.com>
To: Martin Thomson <martin.thomson@gmail.com>, Christer Holmberg <christer.holmberg@ericsson.com>
Thread-Topic: [rtcweb] I-D Action: draft-muthu-behave-consent-freshness-03.txt - ICE lite?
Thread-Index: AQHOFc9GAd3WmsuRzUyNvJjEwtdbCZiPi1Og
Date: Thu, 28 Feb 2013 17:47:35 +0000
Message-ID: <E721D8C6A2E1544DB2DEBC313AF54DE224029994@xmb-rcd-x02.cisco.com>
References: <7594FB04B1934943A5C02806D1A2204B10BB17@ESESSMB209.ericsson.se> <CABkgnnWa8xBRqXhOV+t-oQAzRAquiVQjP_O_2unjP91Hq9U4VQ@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CABkgnnWa8xBRqXhOV+t-oQAzRAquiVQjP_O_2unjP91Hq9U4VQ@mail.gmail.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-originating-ip: [10.65.65.38]
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64
MIME-Version: 1.0
Cc: "rtcweb@ietf.org" <rtcweb@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [rtcweb] I-D Action: draft-muthu-behave-consent-freshness-03.txt - ICE lite?
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: Thu, 28 Feb 2013 17:47:38 -0000

|Yeah, good call.  An ICE lite endpoint never generates checks, and I
|expect that this doesn't change that characteristic.  It should
|probably say as much.

Sure, will clarify in the next revision.

|(The main reason ICE lite is mentioned in considerations is that some
|of the options discussed were eliminated on the basis of having to
|interoperate with an ICE lite endpoint.)

Exactly.

Muthu

|-----Original Message-----
|From: Martin Thomson [mailto:martin.thomson@gmail.com]
|Sent: Thursday, February 28, 2013 9:49 PM
|To: Christer Holmberg
|Cc: Muthu Arul Mozhi Perumal (mperumal); rtcweb@ietf.org
|Subject: Re: [rtcweb] I-D Action: draft-muthu-behave-consent-freshness-03.txt - ICE lite?
|
|On 28 February 2013 00:00, Christer Holmberg
|<christer.holmberg@ericsson.com> wrote:
|> So, when the consent freshness mechanism is used, and one endpoint is ICE lite, I assume it would
|not send consent STUN requests, but only receive them. Or?
|
|Yeah, good call.  An ICE lite endpoint never generates checks, and I
|expect that this doesn't change that characteristic.  It should
|probably say as much.
|
|(The main reason ICE lite is mentioned in considerations is that some
|of the options discussed were eliminated on the basis of having to
|interoperate with an ICE lite endpoint.)

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email