W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-webrtc-logs@w3.org > March 2017

Re: [webrtc-pc] Section 11.6: Issue 6

From: Philipp Hancke via GitHub <sysbot+gh@w3.org>
Date: Tue, 07 Mar 2017 18:58:46 +0000
To: public-webrtc-logs@w3.org
Message-ID: <issue_comment.created-284821030-1488913125-sysbot+gh@w3.org>
A general issue with that diagram is that it shows the legacy callbacks instead of promises. That makes it easier to read though so it might be ok.

Is it really the intention to have such a complicated example?

small issues:
communication with Alice's TURN server (steps 11 + 12) typically happens after setLocalDescription (step 14)

If settings 22 intends to restrict the ip addresses gathered to relay addresses it should use setConfiguration with iceTransportPolicy, not the old iceTransports

The TURN allocation in steps 24 + 25 doesn't happen before setLocalDescription.
Step 27: ugh... pranswer. I don't think I got an answer during JSEP last call on why this is still there. I don't think the example should use pranswer.

30: permissions are created either as a result of addIceCandidate (not shown here) or as a result of setRemoteDescription in step 19.

Its wasn't immediately clear to me why ICE is using Bobs TURN server but not Alice's TURN server in steps 35 and 36. But that is because of the iceTransportPolicy which is set to relay... which the reader has probably forgotten by now.

Step 50 is using SRTP without a relay. Switching from relayed to P2P is certainly possible but requires calling setConfiguration again.

step 60: s/callbakc/callback

GitHub Notification of comment by fippo
Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/w3c/webrtc-pc/issues/1053#issuecomment-284821030 using your GitHub account
Received on Tuesday, 7 March 2017 18:58:52 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 19:21:28 UTC