ice-lite suppprt

[Kanwar bir singh sangha]

Hi - Does Chrome WebRtc impl also supprt ICE Lite ?  (Implementing Interactive Connectivity Establishment (ICE) in Lite Mode). Is yes - what is the way to enable that ?

Thanks
Kanwar

[Vikas Marwaha]

Not yet, please see http://code.google.com/p/webrtc/issues/detail?id=882.

Kanwar

--
 
 
 

[Kanwar bir singh sangha]

Thanks. I am trying to understand ice-lite vs full ice capability. Does that mean for a ice-lite, we still require an entity like STUN(having a ice-lite impl?) ?  Can we not have an ICE entity in the call flow if the end pionts are public IPs ?

[Mallinath Bareddy]

On Fri, Oct 12, 2012 at 3:05 PM, Kanwar bir singh sangha <kbsa...@gmail.com> wrote:

Thanks. I am trying to understand ice-lite vs full ice capability. Does that mean for a ice-lite, we still require an entity like STUN(having a ice-lite impl?) ? 

Yes, ice-lite agent must respond to connectivity checks.

Can we not have an ICE entity in the call flow if the end pionts are public IPs ?

Connectivity checks must be performed for all possible candidate pairs discovered by both local and remote agents, including candidates which have public IPs.

On Friday, October 12, 2012 4:44:23 PM UTC-5, Vikas wrote:

Not yet, please see http://code.google.com/p/webrtc/issues/detail?id=882.

On Fri, Oct 12, 2012 at 2:39 PM, Kanwar bir singh sangha <kbsa...@gmail.com> wrote:

Hi - Does Chrome WebRtc impl also supprt ICE Lite ?  (Implementing Interactive Connectivity Establishment (ICE) in Lite Mode). Is yes - what is the way to enable that ?

Thanks
Kanwar

--
 
 
 

--
 
 
 

[Kanwar bir singh sangha]

Thanks. So if the chrome endpoint supports ice-lite and the sip end point supports ice-lite, you still need a server component (with ice-lite capabilities) to get the reflixive addresses ?

[Mallinath Bareddy]

From RFC 5245, 

A lite implementation doesn't gather candidates; it includes only host candidates for any media stream. Which is useful only when connected to public IP address.

When call is setup between two lite endpoints, there won't be any connectivity checks between local and remote. But when call setup involves chrome and chrome has full implementation, chrome end point will assume CONTROLLING role and it initiates connectivity checks with the lite peer. Lite peer has to respond to stun binding request messages. ice-lite supports doesn't mean that it should behave like ice-lite client, but it should interop with ice-lite client.

FYI, chrome doesn't support ice-lite at this point, but we are planning to support.

--