IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [rtcweb] Proposal to break the ICE impasse

Eric Rescorla <ekr@rtfm.com> Tue, 29 January 2019 00:59 UTC

Return-Path: <ekr@rtfm.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 BA1BA1277BB for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 28 Jan 2019 16:59:25 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.041
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.041 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIMWL_WL_MED=-0.142, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=rtfm-com.20150623.gappssmtp.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 J4bMquB0cMMX for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 28 Jan 2019 16:59:24 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-lf1-x12d.google.com (mail-lf1-x12d.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::12d]) (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 A2E53126DBF for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Mon, 28 Jan 2019 16:59:23 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-lf1-x12d.google.com with SMTP id e26so13343848lfc.2 for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Mon, 28 Jan 2019 16:59:23 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=rtfm-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=mOQM08b/mrt7OXwR4RckvkKX58k72rZlQpRmfcxX+go=; b=KDWWNbUAvQZPui4Bfm7uZo3e0fz6UZ0wjM2TcwWnz5Tucv+s3nThhgcYDp1i3+rcjk v59i/mJG2Ad1rfxjgbRmkditYz7KmCQTNT0IsJUfOQ2nsz91YHM5uPr7CFnFNzq800HI swLsEx+hgBuq37/dBjfPOpxZ5uzWymDqGbyd2aywrpjWVMT5m61nw4xtg6deCzQSYuTU La0mJRFSdzifI9C4TCl+wkxydqMP4itsETAlLrThB84FunZ5p2rSnJj2QCwBXiDeTHsY Xhubp2Q8brtd4ZqYFx50GmVi6l6Ara4RLnAUCJiaM/Q2t581lwt7o+Kqr3r7r3w9xPsv NbGA==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=mOQM08b/mrt7OXwR4RckvkKX58k72rZlQpRmfcxX+go=; b=Z8C97/e8cysbw9h7hopIECT3haUVXxqWKy2s0a+LWVkBYQDNP3PzGXnvY21hsG/AoG KVecipNW3LEg58oJFtpJsyviAckBoRo4aka4n8vv317wg5kRfl3J653MSJKrlt9/1kYt QFdbXVT1aDR5wUBkiWpKG47fcd+YlkrTaR4tSIGMbkEu7SY/ai4GdkwSP6RKDrYFmwaO qOBJehFedpojnXUn7GZc7dOOO5X0Y9sWbdt3o7rQpDAAO5Heh7ukI6ogjcyCwzU5tvQf E7NfytQJHhSiwzrl+pTgyYdXdn367MZAXrvKKj5j1zz46+c/oxWtApAp+iASsfJSPPNX Aqdg==
X-Gm-Message-State: AJcUukcsYm9+fBOAYzx+c7sNDnRvrJ7UD1Qh1qkZB1ppk7x2K35AeCxx lPlyPsit+XkSQbpSI0XCgBUBrs0SKzuMQvyat+JH/w==
X-Google-Smtp-Source: ALg8bN5epNlSWJo0ckNLmw80mHl6WCcFG7M3ZDS0OSqqEIWI4XsidSwLMAnRnVSbFaWQdimDh1+AtPjYvFBPFMawYh4=
X-Received: by 2002:a19:3fcf:: with SMTP id m198mr16657587lfa.106.1548723561717; Mon, 28 Jan 2019 16:59:21 -0800 (PST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
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> <CAD5OKxspmQTV1dFkeF1qQX_HO6AuX5eMHfC+m5f=PAemrS9e1g@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAD5OKxspmQTV1dFkeF1qQX_HO6AuX5eMHfC+m5f=PAemrS9e1g@mail.gmail.com>
From: Eric Rescorla <ekr@rtfm.com>
Date: Mon, 28 Jan 2019 16:58:44 -0800
Message-ID: <CABcZeBN232zmeJgQr51NYhh6Qntc5r81m=rZWqMvDtBuZsTNGQ@mail.gmail.com>
To: Roman Shpount <roman@telurix.com>
Cc: Justin Uberti <juberti@google.com>, "rtcweb@ietf.org" <rtcweb@ietf.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="000000000000c07fc005808e4d38"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/rtcweb/ZUsAQP4040GI2KgdWmfUwgQECf8>
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 00:59:26 -0000

On Mon, Jan 28, 2019 at 4:50 PM Roman Shpount <roman@telurix.com> wrote:

> On Mon, Jan 28, 2019 at 7:36 PM Eric Rescorla <ekr@rtfm.com> wrote:
>
>> If we assume that this is a real problem as opposed to a specification
>> problem, then I agree this is reasonable. However, so far nobody has shown
>> me that this is a real problem, and until that this happens, I'm not in
>> favor.
>>
>> What would you consider a real problem?
>

A system with substantial deployment that works properly with WebRTC if the
default candidates are UDP but not when the default candidates are TCP and
the proto is UDP/foo

-Ekr


> Would the fact that SDP manipulation in WebRTC JavaScript client or on the
> server to work with WebRTC be considered a real problem or a minor
> inconvenience?
>
> Regards,
> _____________
> Roman Shpount
>
>

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email