Subject: [MMUSIC] I-D on proposed modification to ICE

From: Philip Matthews <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 19 Jun 2006 10:39:01 -0400

Folks:

Eric Cooper and I have written an I-D on a proposed modification to  
ICE that eliminates what we think are some duplicate connectivity  
checks. In brief, our proposal is to eliminate connectivity checks  
sent from candidates such as server-reflexive candidates, because we  
believe these are duplicates of checks sent from the candidates from  
which the server-reflexive candidates were derived.

To quote from first section of the I-D:
      "Eliminating checks in this manner has two advantages:

        o  It reduces the number of messages that need to be exchanged
           between endpoints; and

        o  The remaining checks start earlier, because there are  
fewer 50msec
           delays between the start of successive checks. This  
results in
           faster identification of desirable paths.

      Compared with [ICE-08], the modification described here typically
      results in 25% - 50% fewer messages when multiple NATs are  
involved.
      Similarly, the highest-priority working candidate can be  
promoted to
      the m/c line 25% - 50% faster. Since the savings are a result of
      eliminating checks from server-reflexive candidates, the  
reductions
      are less significant when one of the endpoints has a public IP
      address."

The I-D is available at

     http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-matthews-mmusic-ice- 
eliminating-duplicates-00.txt

- Philip

_______________________________________________
mmusic mailing list
[email-masked]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mmusic

---

From: Philip Matthews <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 22 Jun 2006 14:49:15 -0400

Eric Cooper and I have created some examples comparing our proposed  
modification
(in http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-matthews-mmusic-ice- 
eliminating-duplicates-00.txt)
to the processing described in the ICE-08 document.

These examples are available at:
      www.magma.ca/~philip_matthews/

- Philip

On 19-Jun-06, at 10:39 , Philip Matthews wrote:

> sent from candidates such as server-reflexive candidates, because  
> we believe these are duplicates of checks sent from the candidates  
> from which the server-reflexive candidates were derived.
>