<html dir="ltr"><head></head><body style="text-align:left; direction:ltr;"><div>Hi,</div><div><br></div><div>There is no such thing in libnice. I don't think it's very valuable to do that, opening UDP ports in a firewall costs nothing, and really has no added risk, especially if you target a specific computer. If you were to re-use the port, you'd have to do the filtering in userspace and waste quite a bit of CPU resources.</div><div><br></div><div>The one real reason to have multiple connections negotiated from the same local socket is to be able to do SIP call forking, but I haven't seen anyone implement that with ICE.</div><div><br></div><div>Olivier</div><div><br></div><div>On Fri, 2020-02-28 at 10:43 -0800, Gary Bartlett wrote:</div><blockquote type="cite" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex; border-left:2px #729fcf solid;padding-left:1ex"><div dir="ltr"><div class="gmail_quote">I'm wondering whether libnice supports the notion of sharing/reusing UDP ports for its ICE candidates, so that only a single (or small set of) UDP ports can be opened up for it in a firewall?<br><br>It sounds like if I reduce the range of available UDP ports by calling nice_agent_set_port_range, then this will limit the number of active sessions, but if the ports were reusable (e.g. using SO_REUSEADDR or SO_REUSEPORT), do you think libnice could handle multiple concurrent connectivity checks and WebRTC sessions on this single (or reduced set of) local port(s)?<br><br>Thanks,<br><div><div>Gary</div></div> </div></div> <pre>_______________________________________________</pre><pre>nice mailing list</pre><a href="mailto:nice@lists.freedesktop.org"><pre>nice@lists.freedesktop.org</pre></a><pre><br></pre><a href="https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/nice"><pre>https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/nice</pre></a><pre><br></pre></blockquote><div><span><pre><pre>-- <br></pre>Olivier Crête olivier.crete@collabora.com </pre></span></div></body></html>