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

RE: Re: Feedback on the PeerConnection API

From: Li Li <Li.NJ.Li@huawei.com>
Date: Fri, 20 Jul 2012 13:54:30 +0000
To: "public-webrtc@w3.org" <public-webrtc@w3.org>
Message-ID: <B60F8F444AAC9C49A9EF0D12D05E0942216B414F@szxeml535-mbs.china.huawei.com>
I received some of my old posts from the list. Does anybody else have the same problem?

Thanks.
Li

From: Li Li [mailto:Li.NJ.Li@huawei.com]
Sent: Friday, July 13, 2012 12:37 PM
To: public-webrtc@w3.org
Subject: Re: Feedback on the PeerConnection API

> I agree, a way to not use any STUN or TURN server should be specified.

You should be able to just not provide servers.

I think we need to distinguish two cases even without any STUN/TURN server: 1) do ICE without it; 2) don't do ICE at all.

In case 1), I think the ICE agent will still perform host candidate gathering and checking (STUN Bind Request/Response) even without other types of candidates found from the servers.
In case 2), the ICE agent is disabled and no ICE messages are exchanged between peers before RTP - which could be useful if the peer doesn't support ICE.

Thanks.
Li
Received on Friday, 20 July 2012 13:59:02 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Monday, 23 October 2017 15:19:28 UTC