Rémi, On 18 May 2011, at 06:22, Rémi Denis-Courmont wrote: > On Tue, 17 May 2011 21:56:52 +0100, Colin Perkins <csp@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> > wrote: >> What's the concern here? Use the IANA registered port, unless specified otherwise by the application. Any UDP tunnelling solutions must specify a UDP port. > > The concern is that we have two (pairs of) ports. This does not only not fit in the standard SDP m=line, but it does not fit in the traditional sockaddr_in/sockaddr_in6 abstraction (and its equivalent in many programming languages/frameworks). How do you suggest we build a UDP encapsulation solution without using a second pair of ports? It would seem fundamental to the solution space. > It might be that the API makes the problem go away, but that seems like a risky bet in the absence of any sketch of an API (it would not need to be normative). Do you want to propose an API? -- Colin Perkins http://csperkins.org/
