[Standards] XEP-0371 (Jingle ICE): update RFC 5245 -> RFC 8445

Sergey Ilinykh rion4ik at gmail.com
Tue Mar 17 09:54:27 UTC 2020


> who is implementing 8445?
>
> Firefox only implements aggressive nomination.
> https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1034964 has some details.

Does it matter? Do you think the new standard is going to be abandoned?
Do you think XMPP should implement the standard only after other big
players?
But if the compatibility matters a lot for this deferred XEP, maybe ice:0
vs ice:1
in the namespace is a good indicator. In this case maybe it's good to split
the PR into two
(rfc-related and remote-candidates), and maybe add some disco features.
wdyt?

> remote-candidate is a very sip-ish concept not even implemented by
webrtc.org.

But the idea behind is applicable to XMPP. Why shouldn't we take it? I
don't like those MAY/SHOULD etc,
they add a lot of complexity to the code. If ICE SDP says MUST, I think it
has to be MUST for us too
since we are trying to mimic SDP everywhere.

> I don't think bumping the namespace is practical until deployment is more
wide-spread.

I can agree here. But it would be nice to hear more thoughts from those who
already implemented this XEP.


вт, 17 мар. 2020 г. в 12:14, Philipp Hancke <fippo at goodadvice.pages.de>:

> Am 12.03.20 um 22:30 schrieb Sergey Ilinykh:
> > https://github.com/xsf/xeps/pull/905
> >
> > PR Changes:
> >
> >     1. RFC 5245 is replaced with RFC 8445
>
> who is implementing 8445?
>
> >     2. Aggressive nomination is not supported anymore
>
> Firefox only implements aggressive nomination.
> https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1034964 has some details.
>
> >     3. remote-candidate is now MUST to mimic ICE SDP RFC
> >     4. Now remote-candidate has to be send for all components at once
> when
> >     ICE for media stream has completed
>
> remote-candidate is a very sip-ish concept not even implemented by
> webrtc.org.
>
> >     5. Namespace version was updated because of incompatible changes
>
> I don't think bumping the namespace is practical until deployment is
> more wide-spread.
>
> >     6. Wrong reference to RFC 6455 was replaced with correct one: RFC
> 6544
>
> good catch!
> _______________________________________________
> Standards mailing list
> Info: https://mail.jabber.org/mailman/listinfo/standards
> Unsubscribe: Standards-unsubscribe at xmpp.org
> _______________________________________________
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.jabber.org/pipermail/standards/attachments/20200317/e2de6444/attachment.html>


More information about the Standards mailing list