[Freeswitch-users] [rtp-timeout-sec][need experts comments]

[Michael Jerris]

it depends on the endpoint.  There is no reason to send packets when there is silence but many endpoints do anyways.  Due to this, people start depending on rtp timeouts for things.  in ice setups even if there is no rtp there is typically some ice exchange still.  Still none of this is the best way to see a connection dropped, sip times or signaling based methods are better.

> On Feb 20, 2018, at 2:13 PM, Mundkowsky, Robert <rmundkowsky at ets.org> wrote:
> 
> Sorry for the naïve question but are RTP packets with "silence" sent when on Hold?  Or are the RTP packets actually stopped.
> 
> Is the following ICE connection status a good way to check if the other side is down?
> 
> https://stackoverflow.com/questions/21233828/detecting-that-the-peers-browser-was-closed-in-a-webrtc-videochat
> 
> 
> Robert Mundkowsky
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: FreeSWITCH-users [mailto:freeswitch-users-bounces at lists.freeswitch.org] On Behalf Of Michael Jerris
> Sent: Tuesday, February 20, 2018 2:03 PM
> To: FreeSWITCH Users Help <freeswitch-users at lists.freeswitch.org>
> Subject: Re: [Freeswitch-users] [rtp-timeout-sec][need experts comments]
> 
> rtp timeouts generally are a bad reason to tear down a call unless its actually stuck.  The problem with shorter times is sometimes with dtx and hold you can see it hangup on you.  With proper session timers there is typically no reason for rtp timers
> 
>> On Feb 8, 2018, at 12:43 PM, Bilal Abbasi <bilaln018 at gmail.com> wrote:
>> 
>> Hi Users,
>> 
>> I did checked the default value of rtp timeout is 300 seconds, for me its very long, i just wanted to know why it is placed that long, for me if a call is on silent for 30-40 seconds i will hang up that. any down side for doing this?
>>