Re: Do we really need TCP/DTLS/SCTP proto field?
Eric Rescorla <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.ietf.mmusic |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <CABcZeBOSt9B43BbNFw29fLOOwvvTTR18eK_ELmF5-carG=ouuA@mail.gmail.com> |
I also think the re-INVITE is unnecessary. -Ekr On Thu, Feb 16, 2017 at 9:16 AM, Roman Shpount <[email protected]> wrote: > The way ICE is currently defined, ICE enabled end points are supposed to > send a re-INVITE after nomination process is completed with the selected > candidate address in the m= line. So, if tcp candidate is selected, > re-INVITE must be sent with TCP/DTLS/SCTP in the m= line. Also, any > offers/answers after the ICE nomination is complete, are supposed to send > the currently selected candidate in the m= line, which will also be > TCP/DTLS/SCTP in case tcp candidate is selected. > > Based on all of this, I would strongly suggest to keep TCP/DTLS/SCTP. > > Regards, > > _____________ > Roman Shpount > > On Thu, Feb 16, 2017 at 11:55 AM, Christer Holmberg < > [email protected]> wrote: > >> Hi, >> >> >> >> My suggestion is to keep the TCP/DTLS/SCTP definition. >> >> >> >> We earlier made a choice to restrict the scope of the document (by >> removing plain SCTP and DTLS-over-SCTP proto values), and I think we should >> keep the current scope. >> >> >> >> Regards, >> >> >> >> Christer >> >> >> >> >> >> *From:* mmusic [mailto:[email protected]] *On Behalf Of *Ben >> Campbell >> *Sent:* 16 February 2017 17:52 >> *To:* Eric Rescorla <[email protected]> >> *Cc:* mmusic WG <[email protected]> >> *Subject:* Re: [MMUSIC] Do we really need TCP/DTLS/SCTP proto field? >> >> >> >> Process background: draft-ietf-mmusic-sctp-sdp was on today's IESG >> telechat. The draft is approved for publication, but with a point raised to >> ask the WG resolve Ekr's question. >> >> Thanks! >> >> Ben. >> >> On 16 Feb 2017, at 9:43, Eric Rescorla wrote: >> >> I raised this with the authors, but maybe it is worth asking the mailing >> list. >> >> >> >> It seems like we are trending towards a world where we just ignore the >> transport >> >> component of the proto field and let ICE work things out. In that vein, I >> wonder >> >> do we really need to register/define TCP/DTLS/SCTP. It's only really >> useful if >> >> we think people will do SCTP over DTLS with TCP without ICE. Is that >> actually >> >> likely. I note that per previous discussions, JSEP already requires that >> you use >> >> UDP/DTLS/SCTP all the time: http://rtcweb-wg.github. >> io/jsep/#rfc.section.5.1.2 >> >> >> >> -Ekr >> >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> mmusic mailing list >> [email protected] >> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mmusic >> >> > _______________________________________________ mmusic mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mmusic