Priority calculation not possible without knowing component #188

robin-raymond opened this Issue Apr 11, 2015 · 1 comment


None yet

2 participants


   priority = (2^24)*(type preference) +
              (2^8)*(local preference) +
              (2^0)*(256 - component ID)

The trouble is that the gatherer will start gathering on construction and reporting candidates. The trouble is the priority cannot be calculated as per recommendation because the component ID is not known upon construction. Associated RTCP based gatherers are passed into the start method for a transport created by "createAssociatedTransport()" but the gatherer is not specifically an RTCP based gatherer.

@robin-raymond robin-raymond added the 1.1 label Apr 11, 2015
aboba commented Apr 12, 2015

One way to fix this would be to add a .createAssociatedGatherer() method to the IceGatherer, which would return an IceGatherer object with a component attribute of RTCP.

partial interface RTCIceGatherer {
    readonly    attribute RTCIceComponent component;
    RTCIceGatherer createAssociatedGatherer ();
@robin-raymond robin-raymond pushed a commit that referenced this issue May 7, 2015
Robin Raymond - sender.setTrack() updated to return a Promise, as noted in:

- Clarified handling of incoming connectivity checks prior to calling iceTransport.start(), as noted in:

- Clarified handling of incoming DTLS packets, as noted in:

- Added RTCIceGatherer as an optional argument to the RTCIceTransport constructor, as noted in:

- Clarified handling of contradictory RTP/RTCP multiplexing settings, as noted in:

- Clarified error handling relating to RTCIceTransport, RTCDtlsTransport and RTCIceGatherer objects in the "closed" state, as noted in:

- Added component method and createAssociatedGatherer() method to the RTCIceGatherer object, as noted in:

- Added close() method to the RTCIceGatherer object as noted in:

- Clarified behavior of TCP candidate types, as noted in:

- Clarified behavior of iceGatherer.onlocalcandidate, as noted in:

- Updated terminology in Section 1.1 as noted in:

- Updated RTCDtlsTransportState definitions, as noted in:

- Updated RTCIceTransportState definitions, as noted in:
@aboba aboba closed this May 14, 2015
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment