Subject: RE: [MMUSIC] FW: I-D ACTION:draft-kaplan-mmusic-best-effort-srtp- 00.txt

From: "Elwell, John" <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 07 Sep 2006 07:51:50 +0100

Hadriel,

Comment on your ICE comment: 

<snip/>
 
> There have been several proposals of how to do it.  One is to 
> use unique UDP
> ports (essentially your proposal as well I think).  The 
> problem with it is
> it uses more UDP ports. ;)  It means more ICE checks, more 
> TURN allocations,
> and the odds are you'll find problems with using more udp 
> ports through
> firewalls/SBCs.  But it's really a discussion orthogonal to 
> this draft, no?
[JRE] As far as ICE is concerned, yes, the offerer would need to prepare
additional candidates, but as soon as it receives the SDP answer it will
know which stream has been disabled and can eliminate its candidates
relating to that stream. The answerer does not even need to identify
candidates for the disabled stream.

John

_______________________________________________
mmusic mailing list
[email-masked]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mmusic