Mark Michelson wrote:

<snip>


I propose the following algorithm as a fix for this issue:

1. If we are sending a media offer, and there is a configured
media_address on the endpoint to which we are sending the offer, then
bind the RTP stream to the media_address. This means that the rtp_ipv6
setting will be ignored in this scenario.

I wouldn't do this. There's no guarantee that the address specified here is actually bound on the local system. The documentation specifically says for SDP.

2. If we are sending a media offer, and there is no configured
media_address, and the rtp_ipv6 option indicates a preference for the
same address family as the signaling address being used for this call,
then bind the RTP stream to the signaling address. For instance, if the
signaling address being used is IPv4, and rtp_ipv6 is set to "no", then
we will bind the RTP stream to the signaling address being used for the
call.

Fine.

3. If we are sending a media offer, and there is no configured
media_address, and the rtp_ipv6 option indicates a preference for a
different address family than the signaling address being used for the
call, then bind the RTP stream to a wildcard address of the family
indicated by the rtp_ipv6 option. For instance, if the signaling address
being used is IPv4, and rtp_ipv6 is set to "yes", then we will bind the
RTP stream to "::".

Fine.

4. If we are responding to a media offer, and there is a configured
media_address on the endpoint, and that media_address is of the same
address family as the offerer's media address for the given media
stream, then we will bind the RTP stream to the media_address.

See comment above.

5. If we are responding to a media_offer, and there is either no
configured media_address on the endpoint or the media_address is of a
different IP address family than the offerer's media address for the
given stream, and the signaling address for the call is of the same
address family as the offerer's media address for the given stream, then
we will bind the RTP stream to the signaling address for the call.

Fine.

6. If we are responding to a media_offer, and there is either no
configured media_address on the endpoint or the media_address is of a
different IP address family than the offerer's media address for the
givent stream, and the signaling address for the call is of a different
IP address family as the offerer's media address for the given stream,
then we will bind the RTP stream to a wildcard address of the same
family as the offerer's media address.

Fine.

In general, the algorithm attempts to honor configuration preferences
first and fall back to binding RTP streams to wildcard addresses as a
last resort. I'm interested in your feedback on this issue, specifically

1. Do you think the signaling address should be taken into consideration
for this algorithm?
2. Does moving away from a wildcard binding have the potential to cause
issues, e.g. with NAT or symmetric RTP?

So, yes. In an ICE scenario the code will provide candidates for all local addresses. If you are bound to only one then all the others will fail. This should be taken into account - but it ultimately (potentially) lessens the chance of a better route.

Cheers,

--
Joshua Colp
Digium, Inc. | Senior Software Developer
445 Jan Davis Drive NW - Huntsville, AL 35806 - US
Check us out at: www.digium.com & www.asterisk.org

--
_____________________________________________________________________
-- Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by http://www.api-digital.com --

asterisk-dev mailing list
To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit:
  http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-dev

Reply via email to