Subject: [Ice] ICE 'simple' Option text [was: 5245bis: New ICE option to prevent legacy peers from using aggressive nomination]

From: Christer Holmberg <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 24 May 2016 08:12:51 +0000

Hi,

Below is suggested new text for the ICE option:

----

9.  ICE Option

   This section defines a new ICE option, 'simple'.  The ICE option
   indicates that the ICE agent that includes it (in an ice-options
   attribute) is compliant to this specification.  For example, the ICE
   agent will not use the aggressive nomination procedure defined in
   [RFC5245].

   An ICE agent compliant to this specification MUST inform the peer
   about the compliance using the 'simple' ICE option.

   NOTE: The encoding of the 'simple' ICE option, and the message(s)
   used to carry it to the peer, are protocol specific.  The encoding
   for the Session Description Protocol (SDP) [RFC4566] is defined in
   [I-D.ietf-mmusic-ice-sip-sdp].

-----

(IANA considerations)

18.3.  ICE Options

   IANA is requested to register the following ICE option in the "ICE
   Options" sub-registry of the "Interactive Connectivity Establishment
   (ICE) registry", following the procedures defined in [RFC6336].

     ICE Option name:

        simple

     Contact:

        Name:    Christer Holmberg
        E-mail:  christer.holmberg(at)ericsson(dot)com
        Address: Oy LM Ericsson Ab, 02420 Jorvas, FINLAND

     Change control:

        IESG

     Description:

        The ICE option indicates that the ICE agent using the ICE option
        is compliant and implemented according to RFC XXXX.

     Reference:

        RFC XXXX

----

Regards,

Christer

---

From: Peter Thatcher <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 26 May 2016 15:30:16 -0700

I don't really see how "simple" == "implements 5245bis".   Why not just
"ice2"?  It's shorter and has actually meaning: the second RFC that defines
ICE.  If we make a new one in the future, we can call it "ice3".

Otherwise, looks good.

On Tue, May 24, 2016 at 1:12 AM, Christer Holmberg <
[email-masked]> wrote:

> _______________________________________________
> Ice mailing list
> [email-masked]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ice
>
>

---

From: Christer Holmberg <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 27 May 2016 07:29:18 +0000

Hi,

>I don't really see how "simple" == "implements 5245bis".

5245bis is simple :)

>Why not just "ice2"?  It's shorter and has actually meaning: the second RFC that defines ICE.  If we make a new one in the future, we can call it "ice3".

Works for me.

Regards,

Christer

On Tue, May 24, 2016 at 1:12 AM, Christer Holmberg <[email-masked]<mailto:[email-masked]>> wrote:

Hi,

----

9.  ICE Option

-----

(IANA considerations)

18.3.  ICE Options

     ICE Option name:

        simple

     Contact:

        Name:    Christer Holmberg

     Change control:

        IESG

     Description:

     Reference:

        RFC XXXX

----

Regards,

Christer

_______________________________________________
Ice mailing list
[email-masked]<mailto:[email-masked]>
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ice