Re: [rtcweb] [MMUSIC] [Ice] [art] [clue] ICE, ICE-bis, and Cluster 238

Adam Roach <adam@nostrum.com> Mon, 01 October 2018 19:17 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 0CD99130E92; Mon, 1 Oct 2018 12:17:42 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.88
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.88 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, T_SPF_HELO_PERMERROR=0.01, T_SPF_PERMERROR=0.01] autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no
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 sSpEDjv9_5CL; Mon, 1 Oct 2018 12:17:41 -0700 (PDT)
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 30841130DE8; Mon, 1 Oct 2018 12:17:41 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from Svantevit.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 w91JHUjh039495 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128 verify=NO); Mon, 1 Oct 2018 14:17:34 -0500 (CDT) (envelope-from adam@nostrum.com)
X-Authentication-Warning: raven.nostrum.com: Host 99-152-146-228.lightspeed.dllstx.sbcglobal.net [99.152.146.228] claimed to be Svantevit.roach.at
To: Justin Uberti <juberti=40google.com@dmarc.ietf.org>, pthatcher=40google.com@dmarc.ietf.org
Cc: mmusic@ietf.org, art@ietf.org, clue@ietf.org, ice@ietf.org, RTCWeb IETF <rtcweb@ietf.org>, Cullen Jennings <fluffy@iii.ca>, Christer Holmberg <christer.holmberg@ericsson.com>, "Heather Flanagan (RFC Series Editor)" <rse@rfc-editor.org>
References: <15d3b114-5c04-61c4-8a62-61d8a414143d@nostrum.com> <7D1A35C5-FF09-4F93-ABA8-74D877952EF0@iii.ca> <46E40ED2-D289-4C0F-8C0B-82A5980B2692@ericsson.com> <E05D7CB4-832E-4221-ADFE-D8F317EEA8F1@iii.ca> <CAJrXDUGpmZKGQXF0p1hjQv_F=5dQoJLUCT7+6y-=uzwcRv1Ncw@mail.gmail.com> <CAOJ7v-36OvrLo1ud3Uc2Edjk1n2kmY=2bkda-w5kVMVn2QfUVg@mail.gmail.com>
From: Adam Roach <adam@nostrum.com>
Message-ID: <2f5dfed4-1f77-51cf-aec8-0d3e8e8edb14@nostrum.com>
Date: Mon, 1 Oct 2018 14:17:24 -0500
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.13; rv:60.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/60.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <CAOJ7v-36OvrLo1ud3Uc2Edjk1n2kmY=2bkda-w5kVMVn2QfUVg@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Language: en-US
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/rtcweb/_swuvn7gAZIplRF2VZXTGp_cBXQ>
X-Mailman-Approved-At: Mon, 01 Oct 2018 14:11:18 -0700
Subject: Re: [rtcweb] [MMUSIC] [Ice] [art] [clue] ICE, ICE-bis, and Cluster 238
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, 01 Oct 2018 19:17:43 -0000

On 9/27/18 6:20 PM, Justin Uberti wrote:
> I agree with Peter. Chrome's implementation is already closer to 8445 
> than 5245, so I don't see any issues associated with snapping this 
> cluster to 8445 (aside from the work involved).
>
> On that topic, note that JSEP will need a few more changes than just 
> the addition of the 8445 reference and note; the examples will have to 
> be updated, as will the logic regarding generation of offers and 
> answers and their parsing (to deal with the new ice-option). These 
> changes will be modest but probably will need to be done by the authors.


If I read what you're saying correctly, it sounds like you're talking 
about changes that are significant enough that we'll have to put JSEP 
through IETF last call and through the IESG again. That being the case, 
and the rest of the cluster being so close to done, I'd really prefer to 
see this done very soon, if such changes are required. When do you 
believe such an update could be available?

I've copied the RFC Series Editor on this note for her awareness.

/a