IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [rtcweb] What the gateway draft should say about mux/non-mux

Christer Holmberg <christer.holmberg@ericsson.com> Fri, 31 July 2015 18:43 UTC

Return-Path: <christer.holmberg@ericsson.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 D4AD21B344B for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 31 Jul 2015 11:43:47 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -4.2
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.2 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, 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 fvGh9WDf92Wf for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 31 Jul 2015 11:43:46 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from sessmg22.ericsson.net (sessmg22.ericsson.net [193.180.251.58]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 743D11B343F for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Fri, 31 Jul 2015 11:43:45 -0700 (PDT)
X-AuditID: c1b4fb3a-f79356d000006281-79-55bbc1df944f
Received: from ESESSHC014.ericsson.se (Unknown_Domain [153.88.253.124]) by sessmg22.ericsson.net (Symantec Mail Security) with SMTP id 0F.87.25217.FD1CBB55; Fri, 31 Jul 2015 20:43:43 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from ESESSMB209.ericsson.se ([169.254.9.36]) by ESESSHC014.ericsson.se ([153.88.183.60]) with mapi id 14.03.0210.002; Fri, 31 Jul 2015 20:43:42 +0200
From: Christer Holmberg <christer.holmberg@ericsson.com>
To: Bernard Aboba <bernard.aboba@gmail.com>, Roman Shpount <roman@telurix.com>
Thread-Topic: [rtcweb] What the gateway draft should say about mux/non-mux
Thread-Index: AQHQy78thNOz8AYdMEys1nzX7WTf2J316g6A
Date: Fri, 31 Jul 2015 18:43:42 +0000
Message-ID: <7594FB04B1934943A5C02806D1A2204B348E2D52@ESESSMB209.ericsson.se>
References: <CAJrXDUGs_+AKNHhaJjB5udr9TZv7oFpJ7h3cJ_ToXUfUC5TEpQ@mail.gmail.com> <CABcZeBOH6zCEfuH6xh8-sPSmW3y4Vt2cDudfAAtw5MXq90oyWQ@mail.gmail.com> <SN1PR0301MB1551E28A489A90A93FA2F8BDB28A0@SN1PR0301MB1551.namprd03.prod.outlook.com> <CY1PR0501MB1579BC38B75CBC58744A970FEB8A0@CY1PR0501MB1579.namprd05.prod.outlook.com> <SN1PR0301MB15518198D375F21B973C091DB28A0@SN1PR0301MB1551.namprd03.prod.outlook.com> <CAD5OKxvUUSEyCfJcrxTJj68qKZuw6Ddze1Aw1QxXvTnGXT-qfA@mail.gmail.com> <AF9C5DDA-451E-4ED4-A0AA-9853A3983D59@gmail.com> <7594FB04B1934943A5C02806D1A2204B348E29DA@ESESSMB209.ericsson.se> <CAOJ7v-2B0zO7aAjpf9-39o-Bjr7UB9=78Ry17JP8Fff8z_PMWA@mail.gmail.com> <CAD5OKxvtn66yNf10_eSy-1wkD7PopWrmUNpcF+0O_VAzFXw0sg@mail.gmail.com> <CAGTXFp_DwcE5ybS2yypcezo-42Y60FqabBPBBFTgCkPBhmDeNw@mail.gmail.com> <67196805-ED4E-49EA-83AA-3F4C37B5BC50@gmail.com> <CAD5OKxuSSdE2msiP2Saoaka_6UhZBQPoTk27f=6RRNi8-ARtKQ@mail.gmail.com> <D8E1148E-D03A-40A7-8438-4B5AABDF959B@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <D8E1148E-D03A-40A7-8438-4B5AABDF959B@gmail.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-originating-ip: [153.88.183.150]
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_7594FB04B1934943A5C02806D1A2204B348E2D52ESESSMB209erics_"
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Brightmail-Tracker: H4sIAAAAAAAAA+NgFuplkeLIzCtJLcpLzFFi42KZGfG3Rvf+wd2hBjfPaFts2Pef2WLGhanM Fmv/tbM7MHvsnHWX3WPJkp9MHremFAQwR3HZpKTmZJalFunbJXBlNM5tYStoCak4ubeNqYHx TmAXIyeHhICJxM+Xs5ggbDGJC/fWs3UxcnEICRxllNiy7S4rhLOYUaL14EagDAcHm4CFRPc/ bZAGEQE/iYaee+wgNrOApsSEZbvYQGxhAU+JW52LmSBqvCTWfb/GDGEbSXRdmwpWzyKgKrFg 1mywel4BX4lLvzYygthCAnfYJfb+LgaxOQVsJdY/ns4CYjMCHff91BomiF3iEreezIc6WkBi yZ7zzBC2qMTLx/9YIWwliRXbLzFC1OdLtF/rYILYJShxcuYTlgmMorOQjJqFpGwWkrJZQB+D vLZ+lz5EiaLElO6H7BC2hkTrnLnsyOILGNlXMYoWpxYX56YbGemlFmUmFxfn5+nlpZZsYgTG 38Etv612MB587niIUYCDUYmHd8G1XaFCrIllxZW5hxilOViUxHlnbM4LFRJITyxJzU5NLUgt ii8qzUktPsTIxMEp1cCY7W7AK3Tk8eW6s3pTmoIqv3dbL/O+ltE/MyAtO/VsYIGXu4FERMQU fwEjmVmTdyjXLL/D6yG3al/S/HUZXk+u3H1ws1b/wn4v1ulJjjNZZmzKqzk6sUbDQHdSSN2t a6Ur3y39yvhdRpDti+SUj6v+2hz06m1Vd72b2vRGfVlJUqQ/p77I/34lluKMREMt5qLiRABJ X9uRoAIAAA==
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/rtcweb/zGW2aFif-Gc9Pr7-492pmVkDUF4>
Cc: "<rtcweb@ietf.org>" <rtcweb@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [rtcweb] What the gateway draft should say about mux/non-mux
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: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/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, 31 Jul 2015 18:43:48 -0000

Hi,

If we choose to mandate usage of rtcp-mux, we could also mandate gateways to support it.

Regards,

Christer

From: rtcweb [mailto:rtcweb-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Bernard Aboba
Sent: 31 July 2015 21:32
To: Roman Shpount <roman@telurix.com>
Cc: <rtcweb@ietf.org> <rtcweb@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [rtcweb] What the gateway draft should say about mux/non-mux

On Jul 31, 2015, at 10:57, Roman Shpount <roman@telurix.com<mailto:roman@telurix.com>> wrote:

Why would the gateway need to negotiate non-mux if rtcp-mux is supported?

[BA] IMHO, Gateways should be required to support mux like any other WEBRTC endpoint, but this is not what it says in Section 2 of https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-rtcweb-gateways :


"If a gateway serves as a media relay into another RTP domain, it MAY choose to support only features available in that network. This means that it MAY choose to not support Bundle and any of the RTP/ RTCP extensions related to it, RTCP-Mux, or Trickle Ice. However, the gateway MUST support DTLS-SRTP, since this is required for interworking with WebRTC endpoints."


Assuming that browsers remove or do not implement non-mux, it seems prudent to require gateways to support mux so as to avoid negotiation failures. If we make that change then gateways would always negotiate RTCP-mux with browsers.

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email