Re: Interest in a UDP equivalent to the CONNECT method

 

 

On 2018-02-04, 17:24, "Ben Schwartz" <bemasc@google.com> wrote:

 

In my view, a UDP counterpart to CONNECT ought to work not only for HTTP/QUIC but also for WebRTC.  

 

Hi Ben,

 

This is interesting but it is not 100% clear to me what you mean by “also work for WebRTC” (I guess we talk about the WebRTC API as well as the RTCWEB protocol suite).


Could you describe the use case a bit more in detail? I may be a bit confused but it seems as if you propose using “QUIC CONNECT” and will then have a QUIC relay proxy in the webrtc paths. Is that correct?

 

If so, do you have in mind applying it to any “webrtc stream”, both media (RTP today) and data (SRTP)?

 

Or is it the case where HTTP tunneling is applied?

 

Do you assume appropriate API changes in WebRTC?

 

Sorry for the set of questions- may be best you describe a bit more in detail what you have in mind. I may have missed some background.

 

Best Regards

Göran

 

 

That means that it should have the ability to receive packets from unexpected sources, as the remote party's effective address may not be known in advance.  I don't know how to map that semantic into HTTP/2 frames.