ice-wg / draft-ice-pac

Interactive Connectivity Establishment, Patiently Awaiting Connectivity (ICE PAC)

This is the working area for the individual Internet-Draft, "Interactive Connectivity Establishment, Patiently Awaiting Connectivity (ICE PAC)".

• Editor's Copy
• Individual Draft
• Compare Editor's Copy to Individual Draft

Building the Draft

Formatted text and HTML versions of the draft can be built using make.

$ make

This requires that you have the necessary software installed. See the instructions.

Contributing

See the guidelines for contributions.

draft-ice-pac's Issues

Use 'ICE candidates' instead of 'candidate addresses' (Editorial)

Where: Introduction

What: s/candidate addresses/ICE candidates

Why: An address is just one part of a candidate

Mention that this mechanism makes end-of-candidates less useful

See cdh4u#8 for details.

Is it clear enough that the timer will be used even if all remote candidates are discarded?

When I read the "Relevant Scenarios", there are use-cases where an agent will not be able to create any pairs, as it may e.g., discard all remote candidates based on the IP address family they are associated with.

Do we think that the draft is clear that a timer will be started even if an agent will discard all candidates? Most of the text talks about not declaring failure when there are no more pairs to check, but it seems to assume that candidates have at least been accepted (otherwise they wouldn't be tested).

FQDN statement

WHERE: All Candidates Discarded

WHAT:

Remove/rewrite the following:

"(e.g., a candidate that contains a FQDN that fails to resolve)."

WHY: It is unclear whether how/if FQDNs can be used in candidates. I think the text saying that the candidate cannot be used for some other reason is enough.

Name of timer

I think we should give the timer a name. Other ICE timers have names, and it also makes it easier to refer to it in future discussions, drafts, and implementations.

I previously suggested Tpac.

Tupac would also be cool :)

Use 'connectivity' instead of 'peer-to-peer connection' (Editorial)

Where: Abstract

What: s/peer-to-peer connection/connectivity

Why: We talk about establishing connectivity elsewhere

Clarify that no candidate needs to be sent or received before starting timer (Technical)

WHERE: Update to RFC 8445

WHAT:

Modify...

"; note that receipt of an ICE candidate is not required."

...so that it also indicates that no candidate needs to be SENT before the timer is started.

WHY: The text in unclear on whether a candidate needs to be sent or not before the timer is started. The text only says that a candidate does not need to be received.

ICE process failure clarification (Editorial/Technical)

Where: Introduction

What:

Replace:

"If the test for a given pair fails, it is marked accordingly, and if all pairs have failed, the overall
ICE process is considered to have failed."

...with something like:

"If the test for a given pair fails, it is marked accordingly, and if all pairs have failed, the associated checklist is considered to have failed. Once one or more checklists have failed, the ICE agent might consider the ICE process to have failed."

WHY: The text is misleading, as an ICE agent can declare failure before all pairs have been checked, e.g., if a checklist associated with a stream that is required for the session has failed.