W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-webrtc@w3.org > September 2012

RE: Phone call about ICE states

From: Jim Barnett <Jim.Barnett@genesyslab.com>
Date: Thu, 6 Sep 2012 04:39:35 -0700
Message-ID: <E17CAD772E76C742B645BD4DC602CD8106A98B6C@NAHALD.us.int.genesyslab.com>
To: "Justin Uberti" <juberti@google.com>
Cc: "Cullen Jennings (fluffy)" <fluffy@cisco.com>, <public-webrtc@w3.org>
Justin,

For my edification, what is the situation when you have a single  mediastream split over multiple ICE machines?  Is that because there are multiple interfaces available?

 

-          Jim

 

From: Justin Uberti [mailto:juberti@google.com] 
Sent: Wednesday, September 05, 2012 5:13 PM
To: Jim Barnett
Cc: Cullen Jennings (fluffy); public-webrtc@w3.org
Subject: Re: Phone call about ICE states

 

Right - I would suggest we have the single API from Option A, which I think is good enough in most cases, plus an API to get per-transport state if you need more info.

 

Note that tracks are not tied to ICE machines or components. You can have multiple MediaStreams on a single ICE machine, or a single MediaStream split between multiple ICE machines.

 

On Wed, Sep 5, 2012 at 2:05 PM, Jim Barnett <Jim.Barnett@genesyslab.com> wrote:

Justin,

That’s what I was wondering about too.  (Could the transport objects be tied to tracks?)  You could fire events for the state changes on each transport object/state machine, and still have a very simple higher-level conbined state and query API (as in Option B) at the PeerConnection level.  Developers who only wanted to know when things got started and when everything got finished could use the PeerConnection API.  Developers who wanted to manage at a lower level could use the events at the individual ICE machine level.

 

-          Jim

 

From: Justin Uberti [mailto:juberti@google.com] 
Sent: Wednesday, September 05, 2012 5:01 PM
To: Jim Barnett
Cc: Cullen Jennings (fluffy); public-webrtc@w3.org
Subject: Re: Phone call about ICE states

 

I'll be there.

 

I'd also like to propose an Option C, where we have a list of read-only transport objects (1 for each machine), where each transport has a state as in Option A. This would avoid the issues you mention with Option A.

 

On Wed, Sep 5, 2012 at 1:54 PM, Jim Barnett <Jim.Barnett@genesyslab.com> wrote:

Cullen,
  Just asking out of curiosity:  when you have multiple ICE state
machines, do they correspond to the different tracks in the
PeerConnection, or is the mapping more complex than that?

- Jim


-----Original Message-----
From: Cullen Jennings (fluffy) [mailto:fluffy@cisco.com]
Sent: Wednesday, September 05, 2012 3:31 PM
To: public-webrtc@w3.org
Subject: Phone call about ICE states


I want to talk about ICE states a bit as this has been slowing me down.
I set up a bridge for tomorrow at 8 am pacific.  If anyone wants to join
me, I want to talk about the two proposals in the attached slides. If no
one cares, I will just talk to my imaginary friends about making
imaginary progress.


Topic: WebRTC ICE State Reporting
Date: Thursday, September 6, 2012
Time: 8:00 am, Pacific Daylight Time (San Francisco, GMT-07:00) Meeting
Number: 207 963 719 Meeting Password: w3c


-------------------------------------------------------
To join the online meeting (Now from mobile devices!)
-------------------------------------------------------
1. Go to
https://cisco.webex.com/ciscosales/j.php?ED=204263572&UID=0&PW=NNzhiMzA1

ZDI5&RT=MiM0 <https://cisco.webex.com/ciscosales/j.php?ED=204263572&UID=0&PW=NNzhiMzA1%0d%0aZDI5&RT=MiM0> 
2. Enter your name and email address.
3. Enter the meeting password: w3c
4. Click "Join Now".

To view in other time zones or languages, please click the link:
https://cisco.webex.com/ciscosales/j.php?ED=204263572&UID=0&PW=NNzhiMzA1

ZDI5&ORT=MiM0 <https://cisco.webex.com/ciscosales/j.php?ED=204263572&UID=0&PW=NNzhiMzA1%0d%0aZDI5&ORT=MiM0> 

----------------------------------------------------------------
ALERT:Toll-Free Dial Restrictions for (408) and (919) Area Codes
----------------------------------------------------------------

The affected toll free numbers are: (866) 432-9903 <tel:%28866%29%20432-9903>  for the San
Jose/Milpitas area and (866) 349-3520 <tel:%28866%29%20349-3520>  for the RTP area.

Please dial the local access number for your area from the list below:
- San Jose/Milpitas (408) area: 525-6800
- RTP (919) area: 392-3330

-------------------------------------------------------
To join the teleconference only
-------------------------------------------------------
1. Dial into Cisco WebEx (view all Global Access Numbers at
http://cisco.com/en/US/about/doing_business/conferencing/index.html

2. Follow the prompts to enter the Meeting Number (listed above) or
Access Code followed by the # sign.

San Jose, CA: +1.408.525.6800 <tel:%2B1.408.525.6800>  RTP: +1.919.392.3330 <tel:%2B1.919.392.3330> 

US/Canada: +1.866.432.9903 <tel:%2B1.866.432.9903>  United Kingdom: +44.20.8824.0117 <tel:%2B44.20.8824.0117> 

India: +91.80.4350.1111 <tel:%2B91.80.4350.1111>  Germany: +49.619.6773.9002 <tel:%2B49.619.6773.9002> 

Japan: +81.3.5763.9394 <tel:%2B81.3.5763.9394>  China: +86.10.8515.5666 <tel:%2B86.10.8515.5666> 



To add this meeting to your calendar program (for example Microsoft
Outlook), click this link:
https://cisco.webex.com/ciscosales/j.php?ED=204263572&UID=0&ICS=MI&LD=1&

RD=2&ST=1&SHA2=5j5w75EhhDNyDcyfDZrKGY3Wjwpx8bikjAOdbAjI4xw=&RT=MiM0 <https://cisco.webex.com/ciscosales/j.php?ED=204263572&UID=0&ICS=MI&LD=1&%0d%0aRD=2&ST=1&SHA2=5j5w75EhhDNyDcyfDZrKGY3Wjwpx8bikjAOdbAjI4xw=&RT=MiM0> 

 

 

Received on Thursday, 6 September 2012 11:39:48 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Thursday, 6 September 2012 11:39:48 GMT