-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 82
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Is there any plan to support RFC 6062 (TURN TCP Allocations)? #104
Comments
There is no plan to support RFC 6062 as libjuice is a UDP-only ICE agent. RFC 6062 is very niche: a TURN server must have an open access to the Internet, so TURN TCP allocations are only useful if you want a TCP session for file transfer. For instance, TURN TCP allocations are not part of the WebRTC standard. However, I've been considering implementing TURN TCP transport between client and server, which can be useful for a peer on a network with blocked UDP traffic. |
It's great. But I have implemented TURN TCP transport between client and server, RFC 6062 requires this first. The usage is as follows
The code may not be robust enough. May I submit a pull request? |
That's great! Sure, please do, I'll be happy to review it. |
I had a OBS user express interest in this. Networks that have no UDP connectivity or very poor. Are you still open to accepting a patch for rfc6062? If you are do you have any guidance/suggestions on how to implement it? |
@Sean-Der Are you talking about RFC 6062 (TURN Extensions for TCP Allocations) or TCP transport for TURN? WebRTC does not support RFC 6062. |
|
OK, I opened a separate issue for TURN TCP transport: #257 |
Some network environments block UDP and only TCP can passed. I am trying to implement RFC 6062, Is it a good idea?
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: