IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [rtcweb] Default candidate pool size

Martin Thomson <martin.thomson@gmail.com> Mon, 12 May 2014 17:15 UTC

Return-Path: <martin.thomson@gmail.com>
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 D41D11A074E for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 12 May 2014 10:15:51 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham
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 b6qEbGJ3eQ7E for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 12 May 2014 10:15:50 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-wg0-x22d.google.com (mail-wg0-x22d.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:400c:c00::22d]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 37DC41A0733 for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Mon, 12 May 2014 10:15:50 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-wg0-f45.google.com with SMTP id m15so7043607wgh.28 for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Mon, 12 May 2014 10:15:43 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type; bh=EiM4nyyXCUhxoBODshfqZq85oMZT1IKoCXyQvR9wK7Y=; b=CE3k+rxq5ihFOqgCkFxX0F9OBa+8v/1UIaoWQfdE+SVYmPwCeNqnaY99S1nfm4WT/v nkzHrU9gYf/z1jhDt1RLwY+gGASCh3YRT8DYsyAjtwjwG2NZMIQ3WLCvNDCk6Rlforf+ EEpYc0RofIJ+eRveYU1UynqLXzORhmb+GlHZeEiJ7RwLw1t9bTs8qU3FSgIK5tTxpxNW QHeCRB/Ut+OACwR4HB8RsHWdKxz5i/YZ+Pdao1tOSOFTw6qN+yUVn1q2wDtVsWIV+wyh twjg2uVxMBhuz/zGdsu923JNiWf/0k29Y2JdvIiqz6wE0NZ3oh9BaFGYJ3SlzJOzgr32 ndeA==
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.180.36.35 with SMTP id n3mr4258490wij.23.1399914943751; Mon, 12 May 2014 10:15:43 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.194.235.163 with HTTP; Mon, 12 May 2014 10:15:43 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <CABcZeBNdd9Ze1G3ZOpGHVKsGKBdhEAOzg4qt7XKnX75dhQyTkA@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CABcZeBNdd9Ze1G3ZOpGHVKsGKBdhEAOzg4qt7XKnX75dhQyTkA@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 12 May 2014 10:15:43 -0700
Message-ID: <CABkgnnVjJTnTypBqL-YLMPwo0_RSdkMLgQvD+L03jwyt_ffDqQ@mail.gmail.com>
From: Martin Thomson <martin.thomson@gmail.com>
To: Eric Rescorla <ekr@rtfm.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/rtcweb/wJ0sx-h7QGmoJ_Ifc848zmPGu6U
Cc: "rtcweb@ietf.org" <rtcweb@ietf.org>, "public-webrtc@w3.org" <public-webrtc@w3.org>
Subject: Re: [rtcweb] Default candidate pool size
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: Mon, 12 May 2014 17:15:52 -0000

On 11 May 2014 17:18, Eric Rescorla <ekr@rtfm.com> wrote:
>
> My personal opinion is that candidate pooling is useful here and we
> should probably leave the default in the hands of the browser. I
> could live with 0 however.

I tend to agree.  The selection of a default seems like a good
opportunity for browsers to optimize.  For instance, a mobile device
might choose to defer gathering until it knows that it needs them;
whereas a device with a good source of power might prefer the latency
benefits associated with early gathering.  No point in us specifying
this.

v2.8.10 | Report a Bug | By Email