Re: [rtcweb] NAT behavior heuristics

[Harald Alvestrand <[e-mail]>]

On 08/05/2012 11:49 PM, Tirumaleswar Reddy (tireddy) wrote:
>> And that's a rub, since in many/most cases, the 3G/LTE people will
>> likely be talking to non-3G/LTE people, and if either side needs
>> keepalives, then radio will be kept active.  Note we're talking
>> long-term inactive media flows and an inactive (or rarely active)
>> datachannel, such as a client using PeerConnection and DataChannels to
>> keep a registration or empty conference alive, or various non-phone-
>> like applications.
> If just 3G/LTE supports PCP and non-3G/LTE does not support PCP -> Any STUN indications coming from the non-3G can be dropped by the Mobile Network itself to avoid reaching the Mobile Node, since it knows NAT binding is alive using PCP.
>
1) the at-the-moment theory is that consent verification will use ICE 
Bind requests, not indications
2) if the mobile network drops these, the end node will assume that 
consent is withdrawn, and stop.

Agreed with those who argue that we shouldn't spend too much energy on 
optimizing for a moving target.