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

Re: Keeping up data channel

From: Yang Sun <sun.yang.nj@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 13 Jun 2012 21:52:30 +0800
Message-ID: <CAO6ZCZ2GB+hpta7N=oD=Aijad6ey-wYwnu1GXdQpb+3r+mBoJQ@mail.gmail.com>
To: Stefan Hakansson LK <stefan.lk.hakansson@ericsson.com>
Cc: "public-webrtc@w3.org" <public-webrtc@w3.org>
On Wed, Jun 13, 2012 at 9:44 PM, Stefan Hakansson LK <
stefan.lk.hakansson@ericsson.com> wrote:

> On 06/13/2012 03:36 PM, SUN Yang wrote:
>> On Wed, Jun 13, 2012 at 4:15 AM, Stefan Hakansson LK
>> <stefan.lk.hakansson@ericsson.**com <stefan.lk.hakansson@ericsson.com>
>> <mailto:stefan.lk.hakansson@**ericsson.com<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
>>        <mailto:Markus.Isomaki@nokia.**com <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?
> The idea was that if PeerConnection setup is fast (and always works!), the
> app developer would be less resistant to close it when it is temporarily
> not needed.
>  But I agree with you on it is more like a PeerConnection Issue than
>> dataChannel issue.
>> --
>> Yang
>> Huawei
> I see.....
And I agree with you on this.
But it is really not only a matter of PeerConnection setup, in app
developing, we always correlate PeerConnection with getUserMedia, and the
browser will prepare decode array for the stream, prompt user confirmation
of usage of camera etc.
In fact I am considering whether we can have a pseudo-permanant
PeerConnection, and globally store some information like ICE candaites
collect from local network interface, so we will save the time for each
time ICE canddiates collection.

Received on Wednesday, 13 June 2012 13:53:03 UTC

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