[Nice] Gracefull fallback, renegotiations?

mikhail.zabaluev at nokia.com mikhail.zabaluev at nokia.com
Mon Jul 7 08:52:00 PDT 2008


>-----Original Message-----
>From: nice-bounces at lists.freedesktop.org 
>[mailto:nice-bounces at lists.freedesktop.org] On Behalf Of ext 
>Olivier Crête
>Sent: Monday, July 07, 2008 6:34 PM
>To: nice at lists.freedesktop.org
>Subject: Re: [Nice] Gracefull fallback, renegotiations?
>On Mon, 2008-07-07 at 10:17 +0300, Rémi Denis-Courmont wrote:
>> On Friday 04 July 2008 17:23:18 ext Olivier Crête, you wrote:
>> > I guess even if we have a TCP socket, nice could guess which local
>> > socket to pick based on the forced candidate...
>> Depends how you characterize a forced candidate. There may 
>obviously be 
>> multiple TCP sockets on the same local port/IP pair, one for 
>each connection 
>> attempt (and more than that if doing retries), plus the 
>listening socket. So 
>> if forced candidate means the sockaddr, it wouldn't work.
>I'm thinking of caracterising it in terms of remote af/protocol/ip/port
>(which should uniquely identify it?)

Will TURN figure there somehow? It's kind of scary if you mix TURN-encapsulated packets with others in the same socket.

Best regards,

More information about the Nice mailing list