Re: [Wish] How to detect a crashed client?

[Sergio Garcia Murillo <[e-mail]>]

My original idea was that as clients are mandated to send ice consent, the
server would be able to detect disconnection based on the reception of the
ice request sent by the clients.

ICE lite servers should not be mandated to send ice requests in any way.
ICE lite+ or full ice servers may use the consent sent by the servers
instead.

I don't like the idea of using media for this,  as I have never liked the
webrtc approach of sending black frames when media is paused.

Best regards
Sergio

El sáb., 11 sept. 2021 13:29, Christer Holmberg <
[e-mail]> escribió:

>
> >> Network servers are often (please correct me if I'm wrong) ICE lite,
> >> and now there is suggestion that those should do ICE consent. How is
> >> that keeping things simple? :)
> >
> > I don't think the suggestion is that they SHOULD do ICE consent.  The
> suggestion is that they MAY do ICE consent.
>
> Sure, but then I don't think we should talk about ICE lite. If we see the
> need for a new ICE type ("ICE lite++", or whatever we want to call it) I
> think that needs a broader discussion, beyond WHIP.
>
> Of course, an implementation can do whatever, but in my opinion we should
> not specify things that are not aligned with the standard - even if it's a
> MAY.
>
> Also note that ICE consent is sent no matter whether there is media
> flowing or not. But, if you are only interested in knowing that the client
> is alive, I assume receiving media from it is enough? So, the server would
> only need to check whether it's alive or not when it does not receive media.
>
> Regards,
>
> Christer
>
>