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

Re: What is missing for building "real" services?

From: Eric Rescorla <ekr@rtfm.com>
Date: Mon, 6 Jan 2014 10:15:45 -0800
Message-ID: <CABcZeBPu26uwi6DRzhK7QBHWfbghAU=XsTdn6eAkKr5TVAV-PQ@mail.gmail.com>
To: "piranna@gmail.com" <piranna@gmail.com>
Cc: public-webrtc <public-webrtc@w3.org>
On Mon, Jan 6, 2014 at 10:10 AM, piranna@gmail.com <piranna@gmail.com> wrote:
>> That's not really going to work unless you basically are on a public
>> IP address with no firewall. The issue here isn't the properties of
>> PeerConnection but the basic way in which NAT traversal algorithms
>> work.
>>
> I know that the "IP and port" think would work due to NAT, but nothing
> prevent to just only need to exchange one endpoint connection data
> instead of both...

I don't know what you are trying to say here.

A large fraction of NATs use address/port dependent filtering which
means that there needs to be an outgoing packet from each endpoint
through their NAT to the other side's server reflexive IP in order to
open the pinhole. And that means that each side needs to provide
their address information over the signaling channel.

I strongly recommend that you go read the ICE specification and
understand the algorithms it describes. That should make clear
why the communications patterns in WebRTC are the way they
are.

-Ekr
Received on Monday, 6 January 2014 18:16:54 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Monday, 23 October 2017 15:19:37 UTC