Subject: [rtcweb] Dummy ports

From: Eric Rescorla <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 2 Jul 2014 16:22:36 -0700

Folks,

https://github.com/rtcweb-wg/jsep/issues/41

We ran into a place where bundle and trickle conflict.

Trickle requires that you use port 9 for the c-line if you are doing full
trickle:
http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-mmusic-trickle-ice-01#section-5.1

However, JSEP explicitly requires that we use distinct ports for
each m= line:
http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-rtcweb-jsep-06#section-5.2.1

Obviously 9 is equal to itself, so this isn't going to work.

The JSEP editors got together and came to the conclusion that
we probably needed to use sequential numbers < 1024. Does
anyone object to this? If not, perhaps Emil can edit this into Trickle.

Also, JSEP uses the term "null" for these ports. We propose that
instead we use the term "dummy".

-Ekr

---

From: Martin Thomson <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 2 Jul 2014 16:36:50 -0700

> Obviously 9 is equal to itself, so this isn't going to work.

I'm not sure that this is actually a problem, unless I've missed something.

The reason for having different ports is to make it clear that the m=
section will have distinct transport endpoints and can be unbungled if
the answerer wants that.  But the presence (or absence) of
a=bungle-only is sufficient to distinguish those m= sections.

> instead we use the term "dummy".

WFM.

---

From: Sergio Garcia Murillo <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 03 Jul 2014 11:26:48 +0200

> anyone object to this? If not, perhaps Emil can edit this into Trickle.

Using well know valid port numbers as dummy values does not seem a wise 
idea for me.
I don't have enough knowledge of ice trickle to know how this should be 
solved, but it seems that you are trying to hack SDP RFCs instead of 
fixing the ice trickle draft.

Best regards
Sergio

---

From: Iñaki Baz Castillo <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 4 Jul 2014 10:26:20 +0200

> http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-mmusic-trickle-ice-01#section-5.1

Isn't there any other way to indicate it instead of setting port to 9?
¿any attribute?

Section 5.1 [*] in draft-ietf-mmusic-trickle-ice-01 is really exasperating.

[*] http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-mmusic-trickle-ice-01#section-5.1

-- 
Iñaki Baz Castillo
<[email-masked]>