Phil, You are right again, but as mentioned, concept papers (a true torrent over many years lately) and discussion lists cannot replace published measurement tools, measured results and tweaking the approach based on measurements; measuring the improvements, etc.
This is the reason why I am not going into debating points about the merits of ICE, but rather the best approach to make it successful and be able to prove it. ICE is not a protocol agreement like SIP, but a technology that faces the great physical complexity on the net, so the protocol discussion approach is no replacement for testing and tweaking. This probably explains why we are in this discussion about ICE in the first place. By the same token I-D process arguments and consensus are no replacement either for proof on the net. Henry -----Original Message----- From: Philip Matthews [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, July 18, 2007 8:19 PM To: Henry Sinnreich Cc: Magnus Westerlund; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [email protected]; Pyda Srisuresh; Frank W. Miller; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: [P2PSIP] Re: [Sip] RE: [BEHAVE] Re: ICE deployment data before LCfor RFC On 18-Jul-07, at 15:31 , Henry Sinnreich wrote: > Phil, > >> In my view, ICE _is_ a "Hole Punching Technique". > > Yes, you absolutely right, though the devil is in the details. > > We cannot go here into a shoot-out between hole punching or other > mentioned on the list vs. ICE, but there seems to be a huge difference > in effectiveness and performance. What precise algorithm are you talking about when you say this? As far as I am concerned, ICE is simply a well-documented hole punching algorithm. It differs from others that I have seen written up in the following ways: - ICE has the concept of peer reflexive addresses, which other hole- punching techniques that I have seen do not; - ICE has the concept of controlling/controlled endpoint, which gives the controller additional flexibility in choosing a path; - ICE does NOT have the concept of port prediction, which some other techniques do (e.g., Saikat's TCP work). Philip _______________________________________________ P2PSIP mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/p2psip _______________________________________________ Sip mailing list https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sip This list is for NEW development of the core SIP Protocol Use [EMAIL PROTECTED] for questions on current sip Use [EMAIL PROTECTED] for new developments on the application of sip
