Re: [rtcweb] JSEP-04: Some comments on Section 5.2.1. and 5.2.2 (19th september)

Harald Alvestrand <harald@alvestrand.no> Fri, 20 September 2013 10:11 UTC

Return-Path: <harald@alvestrand.no>
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 42BAC21F91BF for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 20 Sep 2013 03:11:05 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -110.368
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-110.368 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.230, BAYES_00=-2.599, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-8, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 2soH3SHu0jhJ for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 20 Sep 2013 03:11:00 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from eikenes.alvestrand.no (eikenes.alvestrand.no [158.38.152.233]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D5D2921F91F2 for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Fri, 20 Sep 2013 03:10:59 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by eikenes.alvestrand.no (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7E47D39E0CE for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Fri, 20 Sep 2013 12:10:57 +0200 (CEST)
X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at eikenes.alvestrand.no
Received: from eikenes.alvestrand.no ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (eikenes.alvestrand.no [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id LNexzbZRn2ZQ for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Fri, 20 Sep 2013 12:10:56 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from [IPv6:2001:470:de0a:27:1003:d74f:d593:c954] (unknown [IPv6:2001:470:de0a:27:1003:d74f:d593:c954]) by eikenes.alvestrand.no (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 7DF5639E068 for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Fri, 20 Sep 2013 12:10:56 +0200 (CEST)
Message-ID: <523C1F86.8040408@alvestrand.no>
Date: Fri, 20 Sep 2013 12:12:22 +0200
From: Harald Alvestrand <harald@alvestrand.no>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:17.0) Gecko/20130804 Thunderbird/17.0.8
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: rtcweb@ietf.org
References: <7594FB04B1934943A5C02806D1A2204B1C4A77DB@ESESSMB209.ericsson.se> <CAMvTgcfevD4FQDqmVccF0UMZ-tSOtt1Fvjof_gkwvoNFUoBeQA@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAMvTgcfevD4FQDqmVccF0UMZ-tSOtt1Fvjof_gkwvoNFUoBeQA@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="------------030400040603030202080209"
Subject: Re: [rtcweb] JSEP-04: Some comments on Section 5.2.1. and 5.2.2 (19th september)
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: Fri, 20 Sep 2013 10:11:05 -0000

On 09/20/2013 10:27 AM, Kevin Dempsey wrote:
>
>     *Q_4:      BUNDLE*
>
>     The text says:
>
>     "If a m= section is not being bundled into another m= section, it MUST
>
>                     generate a unique set of ICE credentials and
>     gather its own set of
>
>                     candidates. Otherwise, it MUST use the same ICE
>     credentials and
>
>                     candidates that were used in the m= section that
>     it is being bundled
>
>                     into."
>
>     As, when BUNDLE is used, the initial Offer will contain identical
>     ICE candidates, does that mean that we will also include identical
>     address information in the initial Offer?
>
>     I don't object to that -- I just want to clarify, as it has
>     impacts on the text in the BUNDLE spec :)
>
>

I think we should be careful here to specify that BUNDLE is used 
according to the BUNDLE spec, and that any description given here is 
non-normative.

Over to MMUSIC....