Re: [rtcweb] Comments on draft-ietf-rtcweb-transports-01

[Harald Alvestrand <[e-mail]>]

On 11/13/2013 07:57 PM, Simon Perreault wrote:
> Le 2013-11-13 13:44, Harald Alvestrand a écrit :
>>> All this relies on the possibility that a TCP peer-to-peer connection
>>> could be successfully established where a UDP one couldn't. IMHO this
>>> is very unlikely to happen in practice. So unlikely in fact that any
>>> possible gain over just falling back on a TURN relay wouldn't be worth
>>> the additional implementation cost.
>>
>> Simon, do you have any numbers on that - how many calls will be going to
>> servers on the Internet versus how many calls will be going
>> peer-to-peer?
>
> Not sure what you mean.
>
>> The argument being given only applies to the client-to-gateway usecase
>
> My point only applied to peer-to-peer connections, not peer-to-server.
> If we're discussing peer-to-server, then I wonder why we're discussing
> that at all.

Because we agreed to include server-based systems in section 3.4 of the
use cases and requirements" document?

I think we have WG consensus that client-to-server based use cases,
while less important than browser-to-browser use cases, are still important.

-- 
Surveillance is pervasive. Go Dark.