&xep0166; defines a framework for negotiating and managing out-of-band data sessions over XMPP. In order to provide a flexible framework, the base Jingle specification defines neither data transport methods nor application formats, leaving that up to separate specifications. The current document defines a transport method for establishing and managing data between XMPP entities using a raw User Datagram Protocol (UDP) connection (see &rfc0768;). This "raw-udp" method results in a lossy transport method suitable for use in media applications where some packet loss is tolerable (e.g., audio and video).
+&xep0166; defines a framework for negotiating and managing out-of-band data sessions over XMPP. In order to provide a flexible framework, the base Jingle specification defines neither data transport methods nor application formats, leaving that up to separate specifications. The current document defines a transport method for establishing and managing data between XMPP entities using a raw User Datagram Protocol (UDP) "connection" (see &rfc0768;). This "raw-udp" method results in a lossy transport method suitable for use in media applications where some packet loss is tolerable (e.g., audio and video).
+Note: The Raw UDP transport does not provide end-to-end traversal of Network Address Translators (NATs); if NAT traversal is needed, Jingle clients SHOULD use &ice; as described in &xep0176;. The Raw UDP transport method is defined only for the purpose of specifying the IP address and port that an entity considers "most likely to succeed" and is a "hit-or-miss" method that might work end-to-end in some circumstances. However, this method can prove useful when the communications architecture includes intermediate gateways or relays, as described in XEP-0176.
The Jingle transport method defined herein is designed to meet the following requirements:
@@ -91,10 +105,9 @@Note: The Raw UDP transport does not provide traversal of Network Address Translators (NATs); if NAT traversal is needed, &xep0176; SHOULD be used. The Raw UDP transport method is defined only for the purpose of specifying the IP address and port that an entity considers "most likely to succeed" and is a "hit-or-miss" method that may work in some circumstances. The method can therefore be thought of as the Jingle equivalent of the "I'm Feeling Lucky" button; it is also helpful for use in unit-testing of Jingle implementation by developers working on a local network (see &xep0208;).
In accordance with Section 8 of XEP-0166, this document specifies the following information related to the Jingle Raw UDP transport type:
+In accordance with Section 10 of XEP-0166, this document specifies the following information related to the Jingle Raw UDP transport type:
The transport negotiation process is defined in the Protocol Description section of this document.
The semantics of the &TRANSPORT; element are defined in the Transport Initiation section of this document.
In order for the initiator in a Jingle exchange to start the negotiation, it MUST send a Jingle "session-initiate" stanza as described in XEP-0166. This stanza MUST include at least one content type. If the initiator wishes to negotiate the Raw UDP transport for a given content type, it MUST include a &TRANSPORT; child element qualified by the 'urn:xmpp:tmp:jingle:transports:raw-udp' namespace &NSNOTE;, which MUST
In order for the initiator in a Jingle exchange to start the negotiation, it MUST send a Jingle "session-initiate" stanza as described in XEP-0166. This stanza MUST include at least one content type. If the initiator wishes to negotiate the Raw UDP transport for a given content type, it MUST include a &TRANSPORT; child element qualified by the 'urn:xmpp:jingle:transports:raw-udp:0' namespace &VNOTE;, which MUST
The 'generation', 'ip', and 'port' attributes are REQUIRED. The 'ip' and 'port' attributes are self-explanatory. The 'generation' attribute provides a tracking mechanism for determining which version of this candidate is in force (this is useful if the candidate is redefined mid-stream, for example if the port is changed).
-Note: The "Raw UDP candidate" is the candidate that the entity has reason to believe will be most likely to succeed for that content type, and thus is equivalent to the "default" candidate as described in Section 4.1.3 of &ice;. This is not necessarily the entity's preferred address for communication, but instead is the "address most likely to succeed", i.e., the address that is assumed to be reachable by the vast majority of target entities. To determine reachability, the client needs classify ahead of time the permissiveness of the NAT or firewall it is behind, if any. It then SHOULD assign the Raw UDP candidate as follows, where the candidate types are as described in ICE:
+Note: The "Raw UDP candidate" is the candidate that the entity has reason to believe will be most likely to succeed for that content type, and thus is equivalent to the "default" candidate as described in &ice;. This is not necessarily the entity's preferred address for communication, but instead is the "address most likely to succeed", i.e., the address that is assumed to be reachable by the vast majority of target entities. To determine reachability, the sender needs to classify ahead of time the permissiveness of the NAT or firewall it is behind, if any. It then SHOULD assign the Raw UDP candidate as follows, where the candidate types are as described in ICE:
| NAT Type | @@ -153,14 +171,58 @@ type='result'/> ]]>
|---|
| Element | @@ -255,7 +278,7 @@
|---|