- From: Harald Alvestrand <harald@alvestrand.no>
- Date: Fri, 18 Oct 2013 08:27:55 +0200
- To: public-webrtc@w3.org
On 10/18/2013 02:34 AM, Cullen Jennings wrote: > Iņaki, > > This is more or less the argument for a default port(s) for RTP. I think a default port would be a good idea. Much of the IETF disagrees with me. (I note a default port for SMTP has turned out to be sort of useful). The place to have this argument is probably the transport area list as they view themselves s the port police. I doubt it will go real well but for what it's worth, I would like a default port. I think that bundle with ICE makes it far easier to have a default port for RTP and greatly increases the number of situations where a default port will work. Unfortunately WebRTC is not one of them, since we have to handle the case where people run two browsers behind one IP address (either on the same computer or behind the same NAT). A default that works in most of the cases, but fails in an operationally significant number of cases, is sometimes more harmful than having no default - because it ensures that there are code paths that are not exercised in cursory testing. But YMMV.
Received on Friday, 18 October 2013 06:28:17 UTC