> > I think this issue should be split up: > > 1) should service discovery be part of the base protocol? If so, > what > service discovery algorithm should be specified? (the current > draft > mentions ReDIR and describes a very simple mechanism for > discovering > TURN servers, which should work well for a known density of TURN > servers)
I think yes. Service discovery mechanism proposed by SEP could be a candidate. > 2) should a mechanism for identifying the ability to be a TURN > server be > specified? > > > It adds complexity, but I'm afraid that there should probably be a > mandatory service discovery algorithm for (1). The existing > algorithm > in Section 9 actually isn't too bad if you can estimate the > density > parameters in advance. It's certainly easier than requiring > everything > to implement ReDIR. Is it good enough? I don't think estimate the density parameter is a good choice. Overlay is dynamic network, and the density is changing over time. On the other hand, the method could not work under unstructured network. > I would really, really like to label (2) as out of scope for the > base > (or mandatory portion of) protocol. I have a question, if we could not identify a peer to be capable of a TURN server, how could the overlay estimates the density? Regards --- Jiang XingFeng _______________________________________________ P2PSIP mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/p2psip
