I don't quite think ietf@xxxxxxxx is the right mailing list for these
technical discussions, but i think better understanding of
conferencing is quite useful if we actually want to make progress
with going more virtual in IETF.
So, for the time being, i'll Bcc: ietc and add manycouches@xxxxxxxx,
if there is a better mailing list pls. let me know.
On Wed, Mar 04, 2020 at 05:39:40PM -0500, Phillip Hallam-Baker wrote:
> BEHAVE works if the NAT implements it. Otherwise, not. A reflector in the
> cloud is a sure bet.
>
> Maybe we are getting to 100%. But remote meeting technology is still
> sufficiently twitchy for it to be an issue. VOIP does seem to have crossed
> that hurdle though.
Actually, i think RTCweb will have less problems with NAT than SIP.
SIP was based on the silly connotation that you wanted to have
competition between alternative components of a communications solution,
such as separately picking server and picking endpoints, maybe even
from different companies. This meant you had to understand SIP
parameters, maybe even third-party STUN/TURN servers, and the user
likely has to figure out the semantics of strange SIP parameters.
And a lot of available services for SIP date back so long, that they
do not support IPv6.
In RTCweb the model is that of complete walled garden end-to-end
solutions, servers and (javascript) clients from the same vendor,
all just using standardized comm & ww protocols. This takes out a
lot of interop problems and customer based solution stitching.
I hope i don't need to start listing all the downsides of this approach.
For example, i was extremely frustrated and gave up on SIP to my
mobile phone: My DSL contract SIP only supports IPv4, my mobile
network only IPv6 APN, and now try to figure out which of the
10 SIP parameters in the client might make 464XLAT work. I think
there is actually a broken 464XLAT implementation in my android,
but i wouldn't know how to even figure out if that is google or
phone vendor code.
Never had problems with RTCweb on phones. Of course, the GUIs
are often useless, so i do of course hate the whole vertical
integration approach of RTCweb solutions (can't pick the client
of my dreams), but thats a different story.
Bigger corporate solutions of course do support 3rd prty endpoint
interop because RTCweb, but those are integrated via SIP and
that means quite limited conferencing "metadata" services.
Cheers
Toerless
