W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-webrtc@w3.org > December 2012

Re: candidate warm up

From: Harald Alvestrand <harald@alvestrand.no>
Date: Wed, 12 Dec 2012 11:45:18 +0100
Message-ID: <50C8603E.9030103@alvestrand.no>
To: public-webrtc@w3.org
On 12/11/2012 07:58 PM, Martin Thomson wrote:
> For the discussion on Thursday (or Friday for our friends from the
> future) on warming up candidates.
> This summarizes the conclusions that we made at the face-to-face
> meeting.  If we can all agree that this is OK as proposed, then the
> time can be freed up for other discussion.
(with my personal contributor hat on)
This seems OK to me, but I have some questions on how it's supposed to 

- practical experience: How long are candidates usually valid for? If 
they stop working (NAT timeout, TURN sever timeout), how can we tell?
- if candidate pool is pre-filled, is the intention that 
createOffer/createAnswer makes an offer that has the candidates 
available at the time? (I think yes)
- if candidate pool doesn't have the number of candidates needed, will 
createOffer return an incomplete offer, and if one wants to have a 
complete one, one has to wait for the necessary number of icecandidate 
events before pulling a completed offer from localDescription (same as 
without the pool)? (I think yes)
- are the candidates gone from the pool when createOffer has been 
called, or will a new createOffer return the same candidates?
- if the pool has been depleted by a createOffer, is it ever refilled? 
(I think not - when in established state, new candidates that don't 
correspond to new addresses aren't needed)

I'm happy to incorporate text based on the proposal in the slides. We'll 
iterate on it.
Received on Wednesday, 12 December 2012 10:45:49 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Monday, 23 October 2017 15:19:32 UTC