Re: ICE in Javascript (Re: Microsoft API Proposal)

On 08/07/2012 09:30 PM, Matthew Kaufman wrote:
> These concerns (largely unwarranted, but that's no longer relevant) lead us in the new proposal to split the timing-critical parts (implemented by the browser) and the choice of what to do with that information (in Javascript or server-side).
>
> What is proposed is substantially different from what was in my I-D, and I'd encourage basing analysis on the specification itself rather than Martin's or my commentary about it.
Happy to do so as soon as the specification says something about it!

At the moment, the biggest section about ICE in CU-WebRTC says:

"Establishing flows of UDP through middleboxes such as Network Address 
Translators (NAT) or firewalls requires the use of techniques such as 
Interactive Connectivity Establishment (ICE) [RFC5245 
<http://html5labs.com/cu-rtc-web/cu-rtc-web.htm#bib-RFC5245>]. The 
provided API describes primitives that enable the implementation of ICE, 
but do not require it other than requiring the consent mechanisms that 
it provides, which is critical to the security of the web."

Most of the other references to ICE are in naming of attributes.

Are you saying that the only part of ICE that has timing issues is 
inside the connectivity check, which is described in section 6.4? (the 
one I remember offhand from last year's discussion was the rate limiting 
of new candidate pair testing to once every 20 ms or so, due to 
limitations in NAT boxes).

And you did not answer my question - have you implemented ICE in 
JavaScript on top of an interface like this?

                  Harald