<!doctype html> <meta charset=utf-8> <title>RTCPeerConnection.prototype.createOffer</title> <script src="/resources/testharness.js"></script> <script src="/resources/testharnessreport.js"></script> <script src="../RTCPeerConnection-helper.js"></script> <script> 'use strict'; // Tests for the construction of initial offers according to // draft-ietf-rtcweb-jsep-24 section 5.2.1 promise_test(async t => { const pc = new RTCPeerConnection(); const offer = await generateVideoReceiveOnlyOffer(pc); let offer_lines = offer.sdp.split('\r\n'); // The first 3 lines are dictated by JSEP. assert_equals(offer_lines[0], "v=0"); assert_equals(offer_lines[1].slice(0, 2), "o="); assert_regexp_match(offer_lines[1], /^o=\S+ \d+ \d+ IN IP4 \S+$/); const fields = RegExp(/^o=\S+ (\d+) (\d+) IN IP4 (\S+)/).exec(offer_lines[1]); // Per RFC 3264, the sess-id should be representable in an uint64 // Note: JSEP -24 has this wrong - see bug: // https://github.com/rtcweb-wg/jsep/issues/855 assert_less_than(Number(fields[1]), 2**64); // Per RFC 3264, the version should be less than 2^62 to avoid overflow assert_less_than(Number(fields[2]), 2**62); // JSEP says that the address part SHOULD be a meaningless address // "such as" IN IP4 0.0.0.0. This is to prevent unintentional disclosure // of IP addresses, so this is important enough to verify. Right now we // allow 127.0.0.1 and 0.0.0.0, but there are other things we could allow. // Maybe 0.0.0.0/8, 127.0.0.0/8, 192.0.2.0/24, 198.51.100.0/24, 203.0.113.0/24? // (See RFC 3330, RFC 5737) assert_true(fields[3] == "0.0.0.0" || fields[3] == "127.0.0.1", fields[3] + " must be a meaningless IPV4 address") assert_regexp_match(offer_lines[2], /^s=\S+$/); // After this, the order is not dictated by JSEP. // TODO: Check lines subsequent to the s= line. }, 'Offer conforms to basic SDP requirements'); </script>