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

Re: Keeping up data channel

From: SUN Yang <sun.yang.nj@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 13 Jun 2012 21:36:17 +0800
Message-ID: <CAO6ZCZ1cNzz8R-A8i2pnza0m47JDDzgbcCa+itvCDqvwgN166w@mail.gmail.com>
To: Stefan Hakansson LK <stefan.lk.hakansson@ericsson.com>
Cc: public-webrtc@w3.org
On Wed, Jun 13, 2012 at 4:15 AM, Stefan Hakansson LK <
stefan.lk.hakansson@ericsson.com> wrote:

> On 06/12/2012 07:36 AM, Harald Alvestrand wrote:
>
>> On 06/11/2012 03:58 PM, Markus.Isomaki@nokia.com wrote:
>>
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> In today's WebRTC meeting a discussion came up on how costly it is
>>> to keep an unused data channel connected.
>>>
>>> As long as we are using UDP, it is extremely costly for cellular
>>> connected mobile devices. In many networks keep-alives at least
>>> every 30 seconds are neeed to keep the UDP flow alive.
>>>
>> We also have to send something every 30 seconds to keep the
>> consent-to-receive alive in the case of media (and to maintain NAT
>> mappings). So as long as a PeerConnection remains unclosed, I think
>> we should assume that a packet will be sent every 30 seconds.
>>
>
> I agree, and I also think this is more of a PeerConnection than a data
> channel issue.
>
> 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.
>
> Why set up PeerConnection fast means closing PeerConnection when not
needed?
But I agree with you on it is more like a PeerConnection Issue than
dataChannel issue.

-- 
Yang
Huawei
Received on Wednesday, 13 June 2012 13:36:51 UTC

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