Re: [rtcweb] [rtcweb-wg/jsep] JSEP says that subsequent offers need to specify the ICE protocol (#854)

Adam Roach <adam@nostrum.com> Mon, 28 January 2019 19:39 UTC

Return-Path: <adam@nostrum.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 AD1A41311BE for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 28 Jan 2019 11:39:16 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.979
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.979 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, T_SPF_HELO_PERMERROR=0.01, T_SPF_PERMERROR=0.01] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=nostrum.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 pek6gjRlU2De for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 28 Jan 2019 11:39:14 -0800 (PST)
Received: from nostrum.com (raven-v6.nostrum.com [IPv6:2001:470:d:1130::1]) (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 579581311B3 for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Mon, 28 Jan 2019 11:39:14 -0800 (PST)
Received: from MacBook-Pro.roach.at (99-152-146-228.lightspeed.dllstx.sbcglobal.net [99.152.146.228]) (authenticated bits=0) by nostrum.com (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTPSA id x0SJdCbF014337 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128 verify=NO); Mon, 28 Jan 2019 13:39:13 -0600 (CST) (envelope-from adam@nostrum.com)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=nostrum.com; s=default; t=1548704353; bh=rjEK+qbBkcqwBrtqTQwGrmVo+quCK++tYDE6tlScfVY=; h=Subject:To:References:From:Date:In-Reply-To; b=JW3wAXlsKDwyRc5bMwWgQCEu9YcprfTXIuVy4hbMctxGaGN8RNWOEsLLEWbpvfN0J CgjFs9d3Zlq6vhoOzipK5HOO3Ipj5GsKw+zNtOyzsJNbc8n1ue9OLyiYepyiuhA8NJ sNV4TkonbfsmnNkfeYKUG6EPLzPbTTILfdef6zTc=
X-Authentication-Warning: raven.nostrum.com: Host 99-152-146-228.lightspeed.dllstx.sbcglobal.net [99.152.146.228] claimed to be MacBook-Pro.roach.at
To: "rtcweb@ietf.org" <rtcweb@ietf.org>, Roman Shpount <roman@telurix.com>
References: <rtcweb-wg/jsep/issues/854@github.com> <rtcweb-wg/jsep/issues/854/458269864@github.com>
From: Adam Roach <adam@nostrum.com>
Message-ID: <bdcf555f-69fa-5f04-e42e-a976cde2bdb3@nostrum.com>
Date: Mon, 28 Jan 2019 13:39:06 -0600
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.13; rv:60.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/60.4.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <rtcweb-wg/jsep/issues/854/458269864@github.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="------------1C6B608D2BD2E18DE5F2A215"
Content-Language: en-US
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/rtcweb/ZsyuazQNJxwtt0G57X3RLzPfS6U>
Subject: Re: [rtcweb] [rtcweb-wg/jsep] JSEP says that subsequent offers need to specify the ICE protocol (#854)
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: Mon, 28 Jan 2019 19:39:17 -0000

Taking it back to the RTCWEB mailing list.

This seems like a better formulation than the text that I put together, 
and it is a similarly minimal change that has no impact on any current 
WebRTC implementations (at least, that I know of).

Justin -- if you're willing to craft text that captures this, you'll 
probably do a better job of doing it in a style that matches the rest of 
JSEP than I can.

/a

On 1/28/19 1:33 PM, Roman Shpount wrote:
> My proposal was to use TCP/DTLS/blah whenever the default candidate is a
> TCP candidate and *ICE nomination is complete*. If TCP candidate become
> default candidate after ICE nomination is complete, both end points should
> support TCP/DTLS based protocol. In all other cases, candidates are
> either still being collected or UDP candidate should be present and 
> used as
> default.
>
> In the initial offer, when ICE nomination is in progress, when ICE restart
> is initiated, end points must still use UDP based proto, since we do not
> want them to send TCP based offer if remote does not support it or change
> the proto during the ICE negotiation.
>
> Regards,
> _____________
> Roman Shpount
>
>
> On Sat, Jan 26, 2019 at 8:29 PM Justin Uberti <notifications@github.com>
> wrote:
>
> > Path in #862 <https://github.com/rtcweb-wg/jsep/pull/862> seems to be to
> > use TCP/DTLS/blah whenever the default candidate is a TCP candidate. As
> > discussed in #394 <https://github.com/rtcweb-wg/jsep/issues/394>, this
> > will break endpoints that don't understand the TCP/DTLS/RTP/SAVPF proto
> > name, but at this point such endpoints should be rare.
> >
> > —
> > You are receiving this because you commented.
> > Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
> > 
> <https://github.com/rtcweb-wg/jsep/issues/854#issuecomment-457880866>, 
> or mute
> > the thread
> > 
> <https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AEh5ShA-_F70HMwECsHCaHt_kHcJPxBhks5vHQD6gaJpZM4X5Svw>
> > .
> >
>
> —
> You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
> Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub 
> <https://github.com/rtcweb-wg/jsep/issues/854#issuecomment-458269864>, 
> or mute the thread 
> <https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AC1khFiKZS_Wmwvu7FfZ2NMgA-hzsf9lks5vH1CNgaJpZM4X5Svw>.
>