W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-webrtc@w3.org > December 2015

Re: Issue 384: should "none" be a recognized value in RTCIceTransportPolicy?

From: Bernard Aboba <Bernard.Aboba@microsoft.com>
Date: Mon, 7 Dec 2015 21:57:49 +0000
To: "public-webrtc@w3.org" <public-webrtc@w3.org>
Message-ID: <BLUPR03MB149F34576133FDEE6CF5E14EC090@BLUPR03MB149.namprd03.prod.outlook.com>
WebRTC Section 4.2.1 refers to RTCIceTransportPolicy which has values of "all", "relay" and "none". Some values appear to relate to sending and receiving ICE connectivity checks (none: "The ICE agent must not send or receive any packets at this point") while other values appear to relate to ICE candidate gathering behavior.

The JSEP Section 4.1.1 discussion on "ICE candidate policy" refers both to candidate gathering and use, with values of "all", "public" and "relay". Overall, the language in JSEP seems more clear to me.

Should we refer to JSEP Section 4.1.1 and update the values of RTCIceTransportPolicy to reflect what is there?

dontcallmedom said in Issue 384 (https://github.com/w3c/webrtc-pc/issues/384):

"JSEP has "all", "public" (cf #8<https://github.com/w3c/webrtc-pc/issues/8>) and "relay", the API has "all", "relay" and "none".

Is "none" still needed or was it useful only when we didn't have iceCandidatePoolSize?

Received on Monday, 7 December 2015 21:58:18 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Monday, 23 October 2017 15:19:47 UTC