[rtcweb] Open data channel issues

Michael Tuexen <Michael.Tuexen@lurchi.franken.de> Tue, 25 February 2014 23:44 UTC

Return-Path: <Michael.Tuexen@lurchi.franken.de>
X-Original-To: rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9ADE21A01E0 for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 25 Feb 2014 15:44:53 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.098
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.098 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HELO_EQ_DE=0.35, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.547, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham
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 00EreHeIBv3P for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 25 Feb 2014 15:44:50 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-n.franken.de (drew.ipv6.franken.de [IPv6:2001:638:a02:a001:20e:cff:fe4a:feaa]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id BD40B1A01CB for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Tue, 25 Feb 2014 15:44:49 -0800 (PST)
Received: from [192.168.1.103] (p508F31B7.dip0.t-ipconnect.de [80.143.49.183]) (Authenticated sender: macmic) by mail-n.franken.de (Postfix) with ESMTP id 601811C0C0BF4 for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Wed, 26 Feb 2014 00:44:48 +0100 (CET)
From: Michael Tuexen <Michael.Tuexen@lurchi.franken.de>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <31B9253D-E826-4D07-A8A1-1B062B50F163@lurchi.franken.de>
Date: Wed, 26 Feb 2014 00:44:47 +0100
To: "rtcweb@ietf.org" <rtcweb@ietf.org>
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 6.6 \(1510\))
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1510)
Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/rtcweb/YlBUQUzvc1Moy_aio4XQBt3NzTo
Subject: [rtcweb] Open data channel issues
X-BeenThere: rtcweb@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
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: Tue, 25 Feb 2014 23:44:53 -0000

Dear all,

Magnus asked me to send a list of open issues regarding data channels
to the list. Here is my current list:


* Priority
  The W3C hasn't defined it yet. Neither for the (S)RTP media nor for the
  data channels. We agreed on using a non strict policy for the data channels
  (some sort of wighted fair queueing). That is all.

* Protocol
  It seems not to be clear what needs to be provided when registering a
  (sub)-protocol at IANA. And the name of the registry is unclear...

* SCTP parameters.
  There was discussed the issue how to set SCTP parameters, especially path.max.retrans
  and association.max.retrans. Also HB.Interval might be of interest.
  RFC 4060 recommends path.max.retrans=5, association.max.retrans=10, but has multihoming
  in mind. To avoid the dormant state, path.max.retrans = association.max.retrans should be used.
  I would suggest 10 for this value. Should HEARTBEATs be disabled?

* U-C 7: Proxy browsing

* Alternate CC for SCTP
  Currently there is only the standard CC. However, in some places negotiation of CC is
  mentioned.

I'm currently going through the backlog of comments regarding the data channels
ID and I'll try to address the issues. If I find other issues, I send an update
to the above list.

Best regards
Michael