IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [rtcweb] Question about ICE-Lite server

Iñaki Baz Castillo <ibc@aliax.net> Sun, 06 July 2014 12:36 UTC

Return-Path: <ibc@aliax.net>
X-Original-To: rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3242C1A0091 for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 6 Jul 2014 05:36:18 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -0.978
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.978 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, FM_FORGED_GMAIL=0.622, MIME_8BIT_HEADER=0.3, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001] autolearn=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 Dw3Lz4-1EsCO for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 6 Jul 2014 05:36:17 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-qg0-f43.google.com (mail-qg0-f43.google.com [209.85.192.43]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 1327D1A0079 for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Sun, 6 Jul 2014 05:36:16 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-qg0-f43.google.com with SMTP id z60so2842252qgd.30 for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Sun, 06 Jul 2014 05:36:16 -0700 (PDT)
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; bh=1detnrOgnz3z5dXH/tBiRr+1fClXJ88x70JZjU8JPWs=; b=JF7vl+kMNtDBIsK7jgGUCMCPmQtpF6eXnUXqIkknqOhRU3KMp9tdRrHHTg5K62K3qX haldmQH8OYNa4pGiQ2GDnHagA2V5WNLa3Bjqqp6f6ROBWNvWLLBVYREPUsRtj30zs936 tx+jHxWAG9ikrAXWgFwdZl9Vj8a2GhK6g//s/EUR28ioG67SBcwzXA1rkNro063fEkXw y2HFeBd8A9WsTxGLnik2hgg+VdM1+yhVARGQzaDINzR9MqqmcHR7ImQznmd0yfPx/KgN CUxJ8JVFYNG/CRavAml7R+6rxRLxsQLH0RVoOVcGkdReLG2/BYN2mG2QBFnZBAsSAwgy dhcg==
X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQmO+rUXfzE6f0N+4jEHm30tB7hcCYL6Fi14dLQ+PNffwnn83G/Tyi9eU3unoEM5YzFpCei0
X-Received: by 10.224.162.212 with SMTP id w20mr37743655qax.50.1404650176307; Sun, 06 Jul 2014 05:36:16 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.96.234.131 with HTTP; Sun, 6 Jul 2014 05:35:56 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <CABcZeBMPyT4y1v12O5pb7Khs2ge0pgjUugrBS0NoK8=SLOScxQ@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CALiegf=kLtiUKoue=ahXP4fUhLJNNd8vCaQTECQxjK5R7cjLTQ@mail.gmail.com> <CAD5OKxv8s5-FNR-kq0C01H_Ev39cyBs5P__Pd-0cmCXDFYy-YQ@mail.gmail.com> <CABcZeBPV_iVcSmi+ndDaYY6zX=F7TRoSDFqe5hzJP3-NjZ7Y1w@mail.gmail.com> <CALiegf=CMAOwVF3=gNY9qrsTfsEwuiwvGZ_1SaS0waOUE83-Ug@mail.gmail.com> <CABcZeBMPyT4y1v12O5pb7Khs2ge0pgjUugrBS0NoK8=SLOScxQ@mail.gmail.com>
From: Iñaki Baz Castillo <ibc@aliax.net>
Date: Sun, 06 Jul 2014 14:35:56 +0200
Message-ID: <CALiegfmjywprsFvsQg10S0nGw08XhuCAjDrqgx2=ZfV-T6_PVA@mail.gmail.com>
To: Eric Rescorla <ekr@rtfm.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/rtcweb/kzBXEE9PVA6fPScxHhJLLfxPztk
Cc: "rtcweb@ietf.org" <rtcweb@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [rtcweb] Question about ICE-Lite server
X-BeenThere: rtcweb@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
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: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/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: Sun, 06 Jul 2014 12:36:18 -0000

2014-07-06 14:08 GMT+02:00 Eric Rescorla <ekr@rtfm.com>:
>> > Nice catch. That actually changes things, since Firefox always uses
>> > aggressive nomination and for performance reasons, I'm not excited
>> > about moving to regular nomination. This seems like an argument
>> > for perhaps forbidding ICE-Lite.
>>
>> I don't understand, shouldn't that be fixed in Firefox?
>
>
> That's one way to fix it. The other is to require that WebRTC peers do
> full ICE. I'd be interested in hearing what Chrome does.

I'm hope not. Implementing ICE-Lite in a server is trivial.
Implementing full ICE is an overhead in a server. Please not. It is
Firefox which must adhere to the standard and use regular nomination
when the peer is ICE-Lite.



>> This is not
>> about performance but about real issues in scenarios with IPv4 and
>> IPv6 in which Firefox talks to an ICE Lite peer.
>>
>> Should I address an issue? or is it already known?
>
>
> Feel free to file an issue.

I will. Thanks a lot.


-- 
Iñaki Baz Castillo
<ibc@aliax.net>

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email