Re: WG Last Call for RTP over DCCP draft

[Lars Eggert <lars.eggert@xxxxxxxxx>]

On 2007-5-11, at 21:18, Lars Eggert wrote:
> On 2007-5-11, at 1:16, ext Colin Perkins wrote:
> > On 10 May 2007, at 18:36, Lars Eggert wrote:
> > >   15 seconds is pretty short. RFC4787 (NAT UDP Unicast Requirements)
> > >   says that "a NAT UDP mapping timer MUST NOT expire in less than  
> > > two
> > >   minutes". If we assume that DCCP will be treated similarly to  
> > > UDP, a
> > >   longer keep-alive interval may be sufficient. (The BEHAVE timeout
> > >   requirement for TCP is longer still.) And yes, someone should  
> > > write
> > >   BEHAVE documents for DCCP and SCTP...
> >
> > The 15 second value was chosen to match the default keep alive  
> > timer in ICE. If it's too short, we should probably change ICE also.
>
> Agreed. It would be good to behave uniformly here across protocols.

Following up on this, since no NAT that I know of currently  
translates DCCP, IMO there isn't a need to be as super-conservative  
with the timeout as ICE needs to be for UDP. Something longer is  
probably fine.

Lars

Attachment: smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature