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

Re: [rtcweb] Default candidate pool size

From: Justin Uberti <juberti@google.com>
Date: Sun, 18 May 2014 10:05:54 -0700
Message-ID: <CAOJ7v-3PwfOiLNtrguNru+L+Aun2Qw7giRx23dobu8eh5NDVDw@mail.gmail.com>
To: Cullen Jennings <fluffy@iii.ca>
Cc: Eric Rescorla <ekr@rtfm.com>, "rtcweb@ietf.org" <rtcweb@ietf.org>, "public-webrtc@w3.org" <public-webrtc@w3.org>
Sounds good to me. As to the default, I'm fine with leaving it unspecified.

Regarding the email from Kiran:
- onicecandidate never fires until after setLocalDescription is called,
regardless of candidate pooling. Candidate pooling just causes any pooled
candidates to be emitted immediately once setLocalDescription is called.
- candidates specified in setLocalDescription are ignored. We could make it
an error to pass in candidates that the browser hasn't given to you, but
that doesn't seem super critical.


On Sun, May 18, 2014 at 9:56 AM, Cullen Jennings <fluffy@iii.ca> wrote:

>
> how about just adding the pool size to RTCConfiguration ?
>
> On May 18, 2014, at 9:26 AM, Eric Rescorla <ekr@rtfm.com> wrote:
>
> > As far as I know, this has been agreed on, but the W3C spec has
> > never been updated to reflect it.
> >
> > -Ekr
> >
> >
> >
> > On Sat, May 17, 2014 at 11:04 AM, Cullen Jennings <fluffy@iii.ca> wrote:
> >
> > I think the JS app needs a way to say what it needs in the way of pool
> size.
> >
> >
> > On May 12, 2014, at 12:15 PM, Martin Thomson <martin.thomson@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >
> > > On 11 May 2014 17:18, Eric Rescorla <ekr@rtfm.com> wrote:
> > >>
> > >> My personal opinion is that candidate pooling is useful here and we
> > >> should probably leave the default in the hands of the browser. I
> > >> could live with 0 however.
> > >
> > > I tend to agree.  The selection of a default seems like a good
> > > opportunity for browsers to optimize.  For instance, a mobile device
> > > might choose to defer gathering until it knows that it needs them;
> > > whereas a device with a good source of power might prefer the latency
> > > benefits associated with early gathering.  No point in us specifying
> > > this.
> > >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > rtcweb mailing list
> > > rtcweb@ietf.org
> > > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rtcweb
> > >
> >
> >
>
> _______________________________________________
> rtcweb mailing list
> rtcweb@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rtcweb
>
Received on Sunday, 18 May 2014 17:06:43 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Monday, 23 October 2017 15:19:40 UTC