Re: [rtcweb] Summary of ICE discussion

Roman Shpount <roman@telurix.com> Wed, 05 October 2011 06:31 UTC

Return-Path: <roman@telurix.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 7DD3421F8569 for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 4 Oct 2011 23:31:56 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.64
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.64 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.336, BAYES_00=-2.599, FM_FORGED_GMAIL=0.622, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id E+vcRrycMiHL for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 4 Oct 2011 23:31:56 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-vw0-f44.google.com (mail-vw0-f44.google.com [209.85.212.44]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D446C21F8564 for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Tue, 4 Oct 2011 23:31:55 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by vws5 with SMTP id 5so1303150vws.31 for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Tue, 04 Oct 2011 23:35:02 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.52.188.65 with SMTP id fy1mr2122034vdc.442.1317796502633; Tue, 04 Oct 2011 23:35:02 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-vx0-f172.google.com (mail-vx0-f172.google.com [209.85.220.172]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id v8sm650089vdg.22.2011.10.04.23.35.01 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=OTHER); Tue, 04 Oct 2011 23:35:02 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by vcbfo11 with SMTP id fo11so1308517vcb.31 for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Tue, 04 Oct 2011 23:35:01 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.52.36.203 with SMTP id s11mr1886087vdj.453.1317796501618; Tue, 04 Oct 2011 23:35:01 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.220.178.74 with HTTP; Tue, 4 Oct 2011 23:35:01 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <4E8BC56E.40306@skype.net>
References: <4E8B192E.80809@ericsson.com> <CALiegfmnxO+BrfycOmL=hptBFdcEpsLeBn=zsJTX=ivKBBumWw@mail.gmail.com> <BLU152-W139AA2913C1CFFDB50726193FB0@phx.gbl> <BLU152-W2342F5823933FA1F2B9F9C93FB0@phx.gbl> <37C37EE6-3D48-4C77-A025-3207F040572B@cisco.com> <4E8BC56E.40306@skype.net>
Date: Wed, 5 Oct 2011 02:35:01 -0400
Message-ID: <CAD5OKxtavopQma+-7t91DYDJ_HNyw-nRMOUXArr=8ya_QViJwA@mail.gmail.com>
From: Roman Shpount <roman@telurix.com>
To: Matthew Kaufman <matthew.kaufman@skype.net>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=20cf3079ba2e5d81c404ae876856
Cc: rtcweb@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [rtcweb] Summary of ICE discussion
X-BeenThere: rtcweb@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
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: Wed, 05 Oct 2011 06:31:56 -0000

On Tue, Oct 4, 2011 at 10:48 PM, Matthew Kaufman
<matthew.kaufman@skype.net>wrote:

> I think what he's concerned about is that a device might consent (using
> ICE) to receive audio and unexpectedly receive multiplexed video on the same
> RTP port.
>
> Not sure this really matters, as there's not much difference between
> low-frame-rate low-res video and 16-bit linear stereo PCM at 48 kHz (which
> might indeed be an audio codec you can choose).
>

Since we already agreed that RTC end point does not need to interact with
anything except other RTC end points, and everything outside RTC would just
be extended to support it, why would not we add additional parameters to
STUN connectivity check? We can add media types, rates, codecs and codec
parameters to STUN request and let the end point only accept the
connectivity check if the media matches what's expected to be sent to this
IP/port. This will probably even work with existing ICE implementations, if
we make these codec parameters comprehension-optional.
_____________
Roman Shpount