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

Re: Keeping up data channel

From: Randell Jesup <randell-ietf@jesup.org>
Date: Wed, 13 Jun 2012 05:29:28 -0400
Message-ID: <4FD85D78.1040103@jesup.org>
To: public-webrtc@w3.org
On 6/13/2012 3:07 AM, Harald Alvestrand wrote:
> On 06/13/2012 01:01 AM, Martin Thomson wrote:
>> On 12 June 2012 13:15, Stefan Hakansson LK
>> <stefan.lk.hakansson@ericsson.com> wrote:
>>> I think we need to make developers close the PeerConnection when it
>>> is not
>>> needed. A way to promote this would of course be to make
>>> PeerConnection set
>>> up fast.
>> Unfortunately, responsiveness is also a trait that is valued highly.
>> Setup for data channels is currently prohibitively long. Applications
>> that are not specifically targeting mobile users will have abysmal
>> performance on mobile networks initially. Expect the radio to remain
>> on constantly.
> I'm really looking forward to having an implementation up so that I can
> test what the setup time is for various media path RTTs and signalling
> path RTTs.
> How far down do you think we have to drive the setup time before you
> would not call it "abysmal"?
> (for reference: the responder's time from hitting "allow" in Chromium to
> having a video on the screen with apprtc.appspot.com is subjectively
> quite short - below 2 seconds - I can't measure it more accurately
> without generating logs for it.)

Well, I *want* time from "ok" to all media live to be on the order of 
200ms or less (I'd like <100ms).  I may not get it with ICE, DTLS, etc, 
but that's what I want.

These are the times I typically could get in a dedicated videophone, and 
that users of hardphones (analog POTS or SIP UAs) are used to.

2 seconds may seem good in webcam chat, but I feel it's already horrid 
at 2 seconds.

Randell Jesup
Received on Wednesday, 13 June 2012 09:29:57 UTC

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