W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-webrtc@w3.org > April 2018

RE: Call for Consensus: ICE Transport Extensions for WebRTC

From: Bernard Aboba <Bernard.Aboba@microsoft.com>
Date: Tue, 17 Apr 2018 21:15:59 +0000
To: Lennart Grahl <lennart.grahl@gmail.com>, "public-webrtc@w3.org" <public-webrtc@w3.org>
CC: "pthatcher@google.com" <pthatcher@google.com>
Message-ID: <SN2PR00MB0141873FA7E1E415B377D728ECB70@SN2PR00MB0141.namprd00.prod.outlook.com>
Lennart said: 

"I don't understand (yet) where this is going. With this extension, one
can create an RTCIceTransport instance... which is standalone and not
associated to an RTCPeerConnection. So, there is nothing one can do with
it since the extension doesn't specify any kind of interaction between
itself and RTCPeerConnection."

[BA] The IceTransport, once created, could be used to construct other objects,
such as SctpTransport, DtlsTransport or QuicTransport objects. 

With respect to the interaction with RTCPeerConnection, I believe that the intent
was to use this in scenarios not involving audio or video
(e.g. data-transport only). 
Received on Tuesday, 17 April 2018 21:16:27 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 19:18:39 UTC