- From: youennf via GitHub <sysbot+gh@w3.org>
- Date: Fri, 15 Mar 2019 22:01:03 +0000
- To: public-webrtc-logs@w3.org
prflx candidates were not surfaced to JS in the past so this requires some thoughts. In particular, prflx candidates are not discovered by the same ICE agent as for local/srflx candidates. WebRTC stats do expose them somehow but it is mandated to not expose https://w3c.github.io/webrtc-stats/#dom-rtcicecandidatestats-address for privacy reasons. getSelectedCandidatePair() might expose prflx candidates. In that case, we probably need to make sure the spec applies the above privacy rules as well. For instance, https://w3c.github.io/webrtc-pc/#dom-rtcicecandidate-candidate might be partially or totally obfuscated for prflx candidates. With some work, we could probably return prflx candidates as part of getRemoteCandidates(). But I do not really see any benefit here. The current definition of getRemoteCandidates is clear, easy to understand and implement. What is the motivation/usecase for adding prflx candidates? -- GitHub Notification of comment by youennf Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/w3c/webrtc-pc/issues/2124#issuecomment-473454778 using your GitHub account
Received on Friday, 15 March 2019 22:01:06 UTC