Re: [rtcweb] Requiring ICE for RTC calls

Roman Shpount <> Wed, 28 September 2011 15:59 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0AAFB11E80B2 for <>; Wed, 28 Sep 2011 08:59:05 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.575
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.575 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.401, BAYES_00=-2.599, FM_FORGED_GMAIL=0.622, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1]
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id MVMsdKBq1Arr for <>; Wed, 28 Sep 2011 08:59:04 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id E62B621F8C92 for <>; Wed, 28 Sep 2011 08:59:02 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by ywa6 with SMTP id 6so8095053ywa.31 for <>; Wed, 28 Sep 2011 09:01:51 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by with SMTP id p1mr38057545pbc.35.1317225711164; Wed, 28 Sep 2011 09:01:51 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( []) by with ESMTPS id u1sm8888273pbr.9.2011. (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=OTHER); Wed, 28 Sep 2011 09:01:50 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by pzk37 with SMTP id 37so21773536pzk.9 for <>; Wed, 28 Sep 2011 09:01:48 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by with SMTP id t8mr45706326pbj.54.1317225708706; Wed, 28 Sep 2011 09:01:48 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by with HTTP; Wed, 28 Sep 2011 09:01:48 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <>
References: <> <> <> <> <> <> <> <> <> <>
Date: Wed, 28 Sep 2011 12:01:48 -0400
Message-ID: <>
From: Roman Shpount <>
To: Cullen Jennings <>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="bcaec520e81774dcd104ae028280"
Cc: Randell Jesup <>,
Subject: Re: [rtcweb] Requiring ICE for RTC calls
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: Real-Time Communication in WEB-browsers working group list <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 28 Sep 2011 15:59:05 -0000

On Wed, Sep 28, 2011 at 10:42 AM, Cullen Jennings <> wrote:

> Many service providers front end their services with an SBC for a wide
> variety of reasons - and that is the place they would likely run ICE Lite
> (note it's not even full ICE they need).

I understand that this can be considered advertisement on the forum, but
does ACME, Sonus and Genband SBC support ICE or ICE lite? As far as I know
they do not. If I am wrong and they do, how long did they have this support?
If they do not, does anybody know what their plans are?

Sorry for such direct line of questioning, but dealing with SIP trunk
providers in US, you interface to an SBC from one of those vendors. So, if
these vendors support ICE, most of the SIP trunk providers would be able to
support ICE.

Even with this covered, we still have an issue of supporting ICE by PBXs and
IP Phones. As far as I know (and my information can be outdated), Polycom
and Cisco phones do not support ICE. I am not sure about the others, but
from what I've generally seen hardware phones in vast majority do not
support ICE.

Please correct me if I am wrong about any of this. I am mostly trying to
determine the level of current market support for ICE.
Roman Shpount