- From: Harald Alvestrand <harald@alvestrand.no>
- Date: Wed, 13 Apr 2016 16:12:27 +0200
- To: public-webrtc@w3.org
- Message-ID: <570E53CB.7090201@alvestrand.no>
On 04/13/2016 01:26 AM, Taylor Brandstetter wrote: > My initial assumption was that the only purpose of the "max-bundle" > policy was to create "bundle-only" media descriptions in an offer. > > But a question came up recently: What happens if you receive a > non-BUNDLE offer when the max-bundle policy is configured? > > Should the PeerConnection: > > 1. Allow this, and negotiate multiple transports? > 2. Reject (port 0) all but one of the media descriptions? > > An application developer may be surprised if they configure > max-bundle, but end up non-bundled. But conversely, they may be > surprised if media descriptions are rejected for no reason other than > the bundle policy. > My immediate reaction (on the general principle that "negotation to less functionality should always work") is that the developer's setting for max-bundle policy affects offers created by the local PC only; if the implementation is at all able to accept the remote side's offer, it should accept it. I think we still require all implementations to support multiple transports. -- Surveillance is pervasive. Go Dark.
Received on Wednesday, 13 April 2016 14:12:58 UTC