Re: [Wish] 2nd WG Last Call for draft-ietf-wish-whip: PATCH and trickle ICE

[Christer Holmberg <[e-mail]>]

Hi,

 

Section 4.1.1. of WHIP-11 says:

 

        “When used for trickle ICE,

           the body of this PATCH message will contain the new gathered set of

           ICE candidates and when used for ICE restarts, it will also contain

           the new ICE ufrag/pwd pair as defined in [RFC8838] Section 5.4.”

 

 

Q1: My reading of the text above is that ICE ufrag/pwd is only included for ICE restarts. However, they are included in the trickle ICE example in Section 4.1.2.

 

Q2: My reading of the text above is that for trickle ICE the PATCH message body will not contain the previous candidates, only the new gathered set.

 

However, Section 4.4. of RFC 8838, which defines the SDP trickle-ice-sdpfrag content type, and the usage with SIP INFO, says:

 

          “Since the agent is not fully aware of the state of the ICE Negotiation Session at its peer, it MUST include all currently

            known and used local candidates in every INFO request.”

 

Since WHIP does not (AFAIU) apply to the MUST above, I think it would be useful with some justification in the draft. For example, is there something HTTP PATCH provides, but SIP INFO does not, that justifies not adopting the MUST?

 

(Related to Q1, RFC 8838 also mandates sending of ICE pwd/ufrag for trickle ICE)

 

Regards,

 

Christer

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

From: Wish <[e-mail]> On Behalf Of Sergio Garcia Murillo
Sent: Monday, 8 January 2024 17.45
To: Sean Turner <[e-mail]>
Cc: WISH List <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: [Wish] 2nd WG Last Call for draft-ietf-wish-whip

 

I have submitted an updated draft with the changes from the received feedback so far (thank you very much Christer Holmberg and  Juliusz Chroboczek!), you can check the changes in :

 

https://author-tools.ietf.org/iddiff?url1=draft-ietf-wish-whip-10 <https://author-tools.ietf.org/iddiff?url1=draft-ietf-wish-whip-10&url2=draft-ietf-wish-whip-11&difftype=--html> &url2=draft-ietf-wish-whip-11&difftype=--html

 

This is the list of issues: https://github.com/wish-wg/webrtc-http-ingest-protocol/issues?q=is%3Aissue+label%3Awglc <https://protect2.fireeye.com/v1/url?k=31323334-501cfaf3-313273af-454445554331-16239e4b827896e0&q=1&e=956c47e4-b735-4093-b176-a9d0bd1c8acf&u=https%3A%2F%2Fgithub.com%2Fwish-wg%2Fwebrtc-http-ingest-protocol%2Fissues%3Fq%3Dis%253Aissue%2Blabel%253Awglc>  that has been covered:

 

I would suggest extending the WGLC one more week so everyone can review and agree with the proposed changes.

 

Best regards

Sergio

 

 

On Tue, Jan 2, 2024 at 7:43 PM Sean Turner <[e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]> > wrote:

Hi! Just a reminder that this WGLC is still on going.

Cheers,
spt

> On Dec 19, 2023, at 20:19, Sean Turner <[e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]> > wrote:
> 
> This email starts the 2nd working group last call for "WebRTC-HTTP ingestion protocol (WHIP)” I-D, located here:
> 
> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-wish-whip/
> 
> This WG Last Call will end 11 January 2023 @ 2359 UTC.
> 
> Please review the I-D and submit issues and pull requests via the GitHub repository that can be found at:
> 
> https://github.com/wish-wg/webrtc-http-ingest-protocol <https://protect2.fireeye.com/v1/url?k=31323334-501cfaf3-313273af-454445554331-5d6d4c2904cb2466&q=1&e=956c47e4-b735-4093-b176-a9d0bd1c8acf&u=https%3A%2F%2Fgithub.com%2Fwish-wg%2Fwebrtc-http-ingest-protocol> 
> 
> Alternatively, you can also send your comments to this list.
> 
> Thanks,
> Sean
> Wish Co-Chair

-- 
Wish mailing list
[e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]> 
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/wish