Re: [rtcweb] Why is required to have local streams before running ICE gathering? (another SDP limitation?)

Iñaki Baz Castillo <ibc@aliax.net> Fri, 14 June 2013 11:54 UTC

Return-Path: <ibc@aliax.net>
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 82C2121F9C67 for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 14 Jun 2013 04:54:17 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.618
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.618 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.060, BAYES_00=-2.599, FM_FORGED_GMAIL=0.622, MIME_8BIT_HEADER=0.3, NO_RELAYS=-0.001]
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 XBmHBwWoQl04 for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 14 Jun 2013 04:54:17 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-pa0-x236.google.com (mail-pa0-x236.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400e:c03::236]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 824C221F9C70 for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Fri, 14 Jun 2013 04:54:16 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-pa0-f54.google.com with SMTP id kx10so580602pab.27 for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Fri, 14 Jun 2013 04:54:16 -0700 (PDT)
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:x-gm-message-state; bh=EFeUzqykwFJ2rUBbJLADRarO6JOSC/kw4UdiKlay6+I=; b=CnN/0DP59A+IJd2beCwtDG0RSuq8KxrDAqfyU5XEktOfj6tWnr9yJCqgSNyunMxJeo g/+EI96FoFCveBaoF02J+Vx8oTzUmehxzAgE7SSFwwU3+Hlc7GGHKznK6fGkKfV3yDlx wipCdQrMoeOqESkdxS7PyR4p61RMkkRVlD/62iE2Hr8W3sC4zPf7re4tGoLI8WqdSZcQ ZA+XQvaUs3+4gl8VpPPHGhEARpeNtiLxpM16/5guToCgGtBDNQkOAaHWSK/EPXH+PZLm eEU3J9RoGZhJny8a/sY7RZil3IpOtMs4s6nBzZ131Eq2ClLaMBp6hJQBQj+rNtAozgj4 oUcg==
X-Received: by 10.66.82.162 with SMTP id j2mr2223417pay.168.1371210856219; Fri, 14 Jun 2013 04:54:16 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.70.78.5 with HTTP; Fri, 14 Jun 2013 04:53:56 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <CABcZeBM6NN2jm9s+mrNj759AiQu31R8QdRgkr65gKxOFm0jvjw@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CALiegf=ABGSR+CRM-GiMJ-Vmk29-FAyCNgWSFfeneB4V6ObkYQ@mail.gmail.com> <CABcZeBPFTOi6S4YXUSPTo1pGvT=zM9_bivi9Q7MAg5wSrATfXQ@mail.gmail.com> <CABcZeBM6NN2jm9s+mrNj759AiQu31R8QdRgkr65gKxOFm0jvjw@mail.gmail.com>
From: =?UTF-8?Q?I=C3=B1aki_Baz_Castillo?= <ibc@aliax.net>
Date: Fri, 14 Jun 2013 13:53:56 +0200
Message-ID: <CALiegfmjvoMgcVRnrsfg4AMdpguDW1X-gmzOKiHZenUGheA7Aw@mail.gmail.com>
To: Eric Rescorla <ekr@rtfm.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQmwh6YBsiUgMcSmNOY8F3pjUl/uvOp7YfEvJZWPB3Hz7SNEEfRJkNcFj2NobZsj9eIn5U+f
Cc: "rtcweb@ietf.org" <rtcweb@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [rtcweb] Why is required to have local streams before running ICE gathering? (another SDP limitation?)
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: Fri, 14 Jun 2013 11:54:17 -0000

2013/6/13 Eric Rescorla <ekr@rtfm.com>om>:
>> 1. There is agreement that there should be a mechanism to pre-specify
>> the size of a candidate pool to gather, though I just glanced in the spec
>> and I didn't see it. (May have missed it though).
>
>
> I see that there still is some (not quite up to date) text here:
>
> Create an ICE Agent as defined in [ICE] and let connection's
> RTCPeerConnection ICE Agent be that ICE Agent and provide it the STUN and
> TURN servers from the configuration array. The ICE Agent will proceed with
> gathering as soon as the IceTransports constraint is not set to "none". At
> this point the ICE Agent does not know how many ICE components it needs (and
> hence the number of candidates to gather), but it can make a reasonable
> assumption such as 2. As the RTCPeerConnection object gets more information,
> the ICE Agent can adjust the number of components.


Hi Eric, thanks a lot for the information you provide.

Is it feasible with the current API to ask for N ICE candidates prior
to having the local SDP set as local descriptor in the PeerConnection?



--
Iñaki Baz Castillo
<ibc@aliax.net>