Re: [rtcweb] Consent Freshness: Some suggestions for editorial clarifications

[Christer Holmberg <[e-mail]>]

Hi,

>>Q1:
>>-----
>> 
>>As STUN binding requests for consent are .sent unreliably, and are not 
>>re-transmitted, I think it would be useful to have some explicit text 
>>saying that individual requests (and/or their associated responses) may 
>>get lost in the network,  and that a sender must be prepared that a 
>>response to such requestmay never arrive.
>> 
>>It may be obvious to us, but maybe not as clear to the first-time 
>>reader of the draft.
>
>This depends on the underlying transport used. If its UDP as you said its unreliable. For other >transports it is not the case. So I don't see a need to add any text in this draft.

I still think text would be useful (I have received questions about this). 

So, you could say: "If an unreliable transport is used,..."


>>Q2:
>>-----
>> 
>> ...
>>
>>
>>Second, there is no explicit text on for how long the client keeps the 
>>STUN transaction alive, i.e. for how long it waits for the response.
>> 
>>I assume that, after 30 seconds, the client does not need to maintain 
>>state and wait for the response anymore. I think it would be useful to 
>>explicitly indicate that, and also say that responses that are received 
>>after that time must be  discarded.
>
> Ok. Will mention that any responses received after 30 secs will be discarded.

I think it needs to be more than a "mention" :) The STUN transaction state machine needs to be clear to implementers.

Regards,

Christer