In nearly all tutorials on WebRTC, the candidates from the onicecandidate callback are sent to the peer via the signalling server prior to createOffer(). The peer then adds the candidate via addicecandidate().
However it is also possible to signal the offer/answer with the ice candidates already built in. This can be accomplished by simply waiting for the null candidate in the onicecandidate callback before creating the offer/answer.
Are there any disadvantages to always sending the candidates via the offer/answer?
gathering all candidates instead of using trickle ice has severe (several seconds) latency implications. This webrtchacks post is still a good description of the topic.
Related
I'm building a video calling app using WebRTC which allows one peer to call another by selecting someone in the lobby. When peer A sends a call request, the other peer B can accept. At this point, WebRTC signaling starts:
Both peers get their local media using MediaDevices.getUserMedia()
Both peers create an RTCPeerConnection and attach event listeners
Both peers calls RTCPeerConnection.addTrack() to add their local media
One peer A (the impolite user) creates an offer, calls RTCPeerConnection.setLocalDescription() to set that offer as the local description, and sends it to the WebSocket server, which forwards it to the other peer B.
The other peer B receives this offer and adds calls RTCPeerConnection.setRemoteDescription() to record it as the remote description
The other peer B then creates an answer and transmits it again to the first peer A.
(Steps based on https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/API/WebRTC_API/Connectivity)
This flow is almost working well. In 1 out of 10 calls, I receive no video/audio from one of the peers (while both peers have working local video). In such a case, I have noticed that the answer SDP contains a=recvonly while this should be a=sendrecv under normal circumstances.
I have further determined that by the time the other peer receives the offer and needs to reply with an answer, the localMedia of this side has sometimes not yet been added, because MediaDevices.getUserMedia can take a while to complete. I have also confirmed this order of operations by logging and observing that the offer sometimes arrives before local tracks were added.
I'm assuming that I shouldn't send an answer before the local media has been added?
I'm thinking of two ways to fix this, but I am not sure which option is best, if any:
Create the RTCPeerConnection only after MediaDevices.getUserMedia() completes. In the meantime, when receiving an offer, there is no peer connection yet, so we save offers in a buffer to process them later once the RTCPeerConnection is created.
When receiving an offer, and there are no localMedia tracks yet, hold off on creating the answer until the localMedia tracks have been added.
I am having difficulties to decide which solution (or another) matches best with the "Perfect Negotiation" pattern.
Thanks in advance!
Yes, it is good to add the stream before creating an offer if you do it 'statically', but the best way to do it is to do it in the onnegotiationneeded event because the addtrack event triggers an onnegotiationneeded event. So you should add the stream and then use the createoffer inside onnegotiationneeded. As far as the answer you can do it before with no issues, but remember that a well-established connection will let you add/remove tracks with no problems (even after the SDP has been set). You didn't post any code but remember that you also MUST exchange ice candidates.
The last piece of advice, remember that all of the above IS asynchronous! so you should use promises, and await until the description is set, only THEN create an offer/answer.
Hopefully, this will help
I am working on setting up group calls involving up to 8 peers using WebRTC.
Let's say a peer needs to set up 7 RTCPeerConnections to join a group call. Instead of relying on onicecandidate event for every single RTCPeerConnection, I was wondering if I can track the client's icecandidates in a central location and reuse it for each new RTCPeerConnection. (e.g. Signaling Server will keep track of a peer's full ICE candidates, and share them with other peers as soon as they need them).
I am unsure what the average number of 'icecandidates' each client will have, but with ice trickle process, it seems that many duplicate http or websocket calls will need to be made to a Signaling Server in oder to exchange ice candidates between any 2 peers.
So I was wondering if I could just "accumulate" ice candidates locally and reuse them when new RTCPeerConnection will need to be made with new peer.
You can not. ICE candidates are associated with the peerconnection and its ice username fragment and password.
There is a feature called ice forking that would allow what you ask for but it is not implemented yet. https://bugs.chromium.org/p/webrtc/issues/detail?id=11252#c3 has some details.
I am using Simple-peer to build a webrtc application. To establish connection, we need to first send the offer and receive the answer. After that onicecandidate event gets triggered generating the candidate, we are required to send the candidate data to remote peer. The remote peer will than run addicecandidate and send back the remote candidate data which need to be added on localpeer using addicecandidate and connection gets established.
I want to understand how simple-peer is handling transfer of candidate data. The SDP data related to OFFER and ANSWER is required to be transferred using server in between, in one of the example socket-io has been used. But how the candidate data is getting transferred?
In simple-peer the signal from peer.on('signal', data=>{}) contains all the webrtc signaling data. If you print out the value of the signal you'll see it contains sdp, offer and answer all labeled to identify which is which.
Scenario:
I'm using WebRTC (Google's libjingle) on iOS and PeerConnection is setup using a TURN server and I'm waiting for all candidates to gather before I send them to the peer (I'm using SIP). The problem is that although all candidates are gathered in around 1-3 seconds (I can see it in the logs) the iceGatheringChanged() callback is not called with state GatheringComplete until after around a whole minute!
Any idea why that happens?
After analyzing the traffic using Google's AppRTCDemo for iOS it seems that for GatheringComplete to fire, the client needs to already have received the candidates from the remote side, and that because it seems to need to setup TURN Allocations and add Permissions on the new allocation so that data can be exchanged with the peer. Is that the case? If so why?
Best regards
Are you exchanging the candidates for both party in real time? You are right, TURN client requires the other party candidates to create permission in TURN server and also to make check lists to start ICE processing.
Related WebRTC, ICE protocol gives the which pair of addresses will work for direct media transfer between the pairs.
Let A and B are two endpoints
To choose which address will work for direct communication between A and B, Person A first gather candidates, encode candidate attribute, encode the SDP offer message, and send it to another endpoint.
When B get offer message from A,then person B gather candidates, encode the SDP answer message with its own list of candidates and send it to person A.
At this end of this process, each agent has a complete list of local candidates and Remote candidates. Its pairs them up, resulting in CANDIDATE PAIRS. To see, which pair work, each agent performs the connectivity checks using STUN req/resp.
How many connectivity checks are performed, to nominate valid candidate pair?
What are the remaining ICE connectivity checks are performed regarding webRTC call?
To develop ICE module for webRTC call, I have to follow each step in RFC5245 or any thing else?
How many connectivity checks are performed, to nominate valid
candidate pair?
The number of candidate pairs are the number of connectivity checks done by each side.
What are the remaining ICE connectivity checks are performed regarding
webRTC call?
There are no extra ICE connectivity checks for webRTC.
To develop ICE module for webRTC call, I have to follow each step in
RFC5245 or any thing else?
You have to implement or use existing implementation of DTLS protocol, RFC5763 and RFC5764. DTLS implementation can be found on OpenSSL library.
All these seems a lot of work but if you use openssl then its easy enough.