Re: [rtcweb] ICE-Mismatch and WebRTC

[Justin Uberti <[e-mail]>]

Yes, port 0 will be understood.
No, 0.0.0.0 will not be handled.
Agree ice-mismatch should result in an error, similar to that if no ICE
info was present.
On Jul 11, 2014 1:42 PM, "Roman Shpount" <[e-mail]> wrote:

> On Fri, Jul 11, 2014 at 12:07 PM, Justin Uberti <[e-mail]>
> wrote:
>
>> The fact that WebRTC implementations MUST ignore the address and port in
>> the c=/m= lines will be written into JSEP, S 5.6/5.7.
>>
>>
>> Is it going to completely ignore these parameters or would it still honor
> port 0 to indicate that m line disabled?
>
> What about 0.0.0.0 address to indicate hold? These should not be allowed
> per RFC 5245 section 9.1.1.1 but I still do see it used in SIP, especially
> with various B2BUA scenarios where this is the only way for a pure
> signaling agent to put a call on hold or to resolve collision. There are
> other ways to deal with this in WebRTC but this will still come up during
> interop with SIP.
>
> Would it also document on what happens when WebRTC implementation receives
> an answer SDP with ice-mismatch attribute? An error in such case is
> probably the most appropriate action.
> _____________
> Roman Shpount
>
>