Project: webrtc Issues People Development process History Sign in
New issue
Advanced search Search tips
Note: Color blocks (like or ) mean that a user may not be available. Tooltip shows the reason.
Starred by 5 users
Status: Assigned
Owner:
Last visit > 30 days ago
Cc:
Components:
OS: ----
Pri: 3
Type: Enhancement

Blocked on:
issue 1406



Sign in to add a comment
Support SSODA for allocating TURN v4/v6 addresses
Project Member Reported by juberti@webrtc.org, Mar 21 2014 Back to list
Project Member Comment 1 by juberti@webrtc.org, Aug 21 2014
Owner: juberti@webrtc.org
Assigning to Justin until spec is updated to address WG feedback.
Comment 2 by juberti@google.com, Oct 17 2014
Labels: -Type-Bug -Area-Transport Type-Enhancement Area-Network
Comment 3 by vrk@webrtc.org, Nov 3 2014
Blockedon: webrtc:1406
Labels: Area-Compliance-1.0 EngTriaged IceBox
Project Member Comment 4 by tnakamura@webrtc.org, Nov 4 2015
Cc: pthatcher@webrtc.org hta@webrtc.org
This bug hasn't been modified for more than a year. Is this still a valid open issue?
Project Member Comment 5 by juberti@webrtc.org, Nov 5 2015
yes, let's keep
Project Member Comment 7 by juberti@webrtc.org, Nov 6 2015
Cc: juberti@webrtc.org honghaiz@webrtc.org
Owner: guoweis@webrtc.org
TurnPorts on v4 interfaces should use AAF to allocate v4 + v6.
TurnPorts on v6 interfaces should use RAF to allocate just v6.
I don't think we want to encourage v6 TurnPorts to allocate v4 addresses.

This way, v4-to-v6 will use v4 on the short leg (to TURN server) and v6 to the long leg (the remote endpoint, or remote TURN). And we reduce the number of candidates we generate.
Project Member Comment 8 by pthatcher@webrtc.org, Feb 8 2016
Owner: pthatcher@webrtc.org
Project Member Comment 9 by kjellander@webrtc.org, Nov 3 2016
Components: SpecConformance>WebRTC-1_0
Project Member Comment 10 by kjellander@webrtc.org, Nov 3 2016
Components: SpecConformance
Project Member Comment 11 by pthatcher@webrtc.org, Nov 8 2016
Labels: -Pri-2 Pri-3
Sign in to add a comment