[Nice] Gracefull fallback, renegotiations?

Olivier Crête olivier.crete at collabora.co.uk
Tue May 6 06:59:01 PDT 2008

On Tue, 2008-05-06 at 16:47 +0300, Rémi Denis-Courmont wrote:
> Le Tuesday 06 May 2008 16:39:24 ext Olivier Crête, vous avez écrit :
> > I think the problem Mikhail sees here is that you have to set the remote
> > candidates before doing set_selected_pair(), so it will start doing ice
> > checks before we have a chance to stop it. And that could confuse legacy
> > implementations.
> I might be totally confused, but... it seems quite impossible that ICE checks 
> would ever occur against a legacy device. Legacy devices don't send ICE 
> candidates, so there is nowhere to send ICE checks to.

Well, to be able to give libnice the address on the m= line, you have to
create a "non-ice" candidate which libnice won't be able to
differentiate from an ice candidate and will start doing connchecks on.
Or am I missing something?

Olivier Crête
olivier.crete at collabora.co.uk
Collabora Ltd
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
Url : http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/nice/attachments/20080506/2b0c1f67/attachment.pgp 

More information about the Nice mailing list