- From: Martin Thomson <martin.thomson@gmail.com>
- Date: Fri, 5 Sep 2014 14:47:55 -0700
- To: Gunnar Hellstrom <gunnar.hellstrom@omnitor.se>
- Cc: Michael Tuexen <Michael.Tuexen@lurchi.franken.de>, "public-webrtc@w3.org" <public-webrtc@w3.org>
On 5 September 2014 11:14, Gunnar Hellstrom <gunnar.hellstrom@omnitor.se> wrote: > So, you expect that in most cases the retries for a reliable channel will > spread over 30 seconds, and if still unsuccessful, the Association and all > its channels will be aborted. No, my point was that the association timers run longer than the timers that govern liveness of a single path. That means that an association can survive a path failure if an alternative path is found, and it seems like we have ample time to do that. Some implementations already attempt that process, though I can't speak to the efficacy. > Can you explain how you got that 30 seconds figure? https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-rtcweb-stun-consent-freshness
Received on Friday, 5 September 2014 21:48:23 UTC