W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-webrtc@w3.org > February 2014

Re: ICE priority levels.

From: Byron Campen <docfaraday@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 06 Feb 2014 20:40:35 -0800
Message-ID: <52F463C3.5040308@gmail.com>
To: Kiran Kumar <g.kiranreddy4u@gmail.com>, "public-webrtc@w3.org" <public-webrtc@w3.org>
     Gathering is done in parallel, without any throttling, so the 
gathering of relayed candidates will not be delayed by host or server 
reflexive ones.

Best regards,
Byron Campen

On 2/6/14 8:20 PM, Kiran Kumar wrote:
> Hi,
> The following is my suggestion to change the spec regarding ICE 
> priority levels.
> According to [1]
> "The application gives the users the opportunity to stop it from
>     exposing the host IP address to the application of the other user."
> This can be achieved by communicating only relay candidates to the 
> other peer instead of local and stun candidates.
>
> But according to ICE implementations, it will first gather local 
> candidates, then stun and finally turn candidates. In this regard, the 
> session establishment time will be increased.
>
> So there should be an API or constraint that should convey the 
> priority levels for ICE candidate gathering, so that, if user want to 
> hide his ip-address, then TURN candidate gathering should take high 
> priority instead of local and stun candidate gathering.
>
> [1] 
> http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-rtcweb-use-cases-and-requirements-13
>
> Thanks,
> Kiran.
Received on Friday, 7 February 2014 04:41:05 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Monday, 23 October 2017 15:19:38 UTC