Sounds reasonable to me. FWIW, Chrome uses the mid if it's present (in which case the index is ignored). On Mon, Sep 3, 2012 at 8:08 AM, Eric Rescorla <ekr@rtfm.com> wrote: > On Mon, Sep 3, 2012 at 8:02 AM, Cullen Jennings (fluffy) > <fluffy@cisco.com> wrote: > > > > On Aug 20, 2012, at 10:39 AM, Eric Rescorla <ekr@rtfm.com> wrote: > > > >>> I also think the m= index strategy has several shortcomings, so using > "mid" > >>> when available allows us to avoid chaining ourselves to m= index. > >> > >> In that case, I propose that the spec at minimum require that only > either > >> mid or index be present. That way there's no room for disagreement > >> about the semantics. > >> > >> Thoughts? > > > > Hmm, given that browser does not know when creating a candidate if the > candidate is being used by Jingle, SIP or something else, that seems a bit > problematic. > > > > Perhaps we should say when a candidate is generated by the browser, it > will have both mid and index. When the browser consumes a candidate, if > both are present and they do not indicate the same thing, then an error is > reported since clearly something is borked in this case. The browser needs > to be able to receive candidates that only have only mid or only index. > > I can live with that. > > At minimum the spec must require that they match... I could live with > it being undefined > to have them not match. > > -Ekr >Received on Tuesday, 4 September 2012 06:24:29 UTC
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 19:17:33 UTC