Re: [bfcpbis] I-D Action: draft-ietf-bfcpbis-bfcp-websocket-05.txt

"Gonzalo Salgueiro (gsalguei)" <gsalguei@cisco.com> Mon, 15 February 2016 19:15 UTC

Return-Path: <gsalguei@cisco.com>
X-Original-To: bfcpbis@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: bfcpbis@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B32C51AD0A0 for <bfcpbis@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 15 Feb 2016 11:15:41 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -14.507
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-14.507 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.006, SPF_PASS=-0.001, USER_IN_DEF_DKIM_WL=-7.5] autolearn=ham
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 0qd-I0iKsAMt for <bfcpbis@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 15 Feb 2016 11:15:39 -0800 (PST)
Received: from alln-iport-7.cisco.com (alln-iport-7.cisco.com [173.37.142.94]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-SEED-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 2AF311AD09C for <bfcpbis@ietf.org>; Mon, 15 Feb 2016 11:15:39 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=@cisco.com; l=10022; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1455563739; x=1456773339; h=from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:references: in-reply-to:content-transfer-encoding:mime-version; bh=16Zkp7/gD9CMCQMSdY9Rsj8WeWhISVomNlgVf1a0mMw=; b=mxVHUnoAH0kvVCJREbG6Pcd/8cOBgEUrc/7Lo8flEcPp9IVUkcJ5OJbT lSysV9OTDaM6MGEtsU7JBGYfgVxAf5uuDNuhJ/FwGpi0r1IdkChyggUjG 2Mbm4E1bF80tFJm9YuDRQrsE4HizZs/VlzBL1nhLv9+SvvcZ+rc/ndaiF Y=;
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: =?us-ascii?q?A0AiAgBII8JW/5pdJa1dgzpSXg+6HgENg?= =?us-ascii?q?WcXCoUiSgKBNjgUAQEBAQEBAYEKhEEBAQEDAQEBAWsLBQcEAgEIEQMBAQEBJwc?= =?us-ascii?q?nCxQJCAIEDgWIEggOtn8BAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEVhhGBa4FPe4Qwg?= =?us-ascii?q?y2BDwWSboQLAYVOiAaBXEqDeYhVjj0BHgEBQoICGYFIaohPAQEB?=
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.22,451,1449532800"; d="scan'208";a="238689581"
Received: from rcdn-core-3.cisco.com ([173.37.93.154]) by alln-iport-7.cisco.com with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 15 Feb 2016 19:15:37 +0000
Received: from XCH-RCD-007.cisco.com (xch-rcd-007.cisco.com [173.37.102.17]) by rcdn-core-3.cisco.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id u1FJFc3n001564 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=FAIL); Mon, 15 Feb 2016 19:15:38 GMT
Received: from xch-aln-009.cisco.com (173.36.7.19) by XCH-RCD-007.cisco.com (173.37.102.17) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1104.5; Mon, 15 Feb 2016 13:15:36 -0600
Received: from xch-aln-009.cisco.com ([173.36.7.19]) by XCH-ALN-009.cisco.com ([173.36.7.19]) with mapi id 15.00.1104.009; Mon, 15 Feb 2016 13:15:37 -0600
From: "Gonzalo Salgueiro (gsalguei)" <gsalguei@cisco.com>
To: "Suhas Nandakumar (snandaku)" <snandaku@cisco.com>
Thread-Topic: [bfcpbis] I-D Action: draft-ietf-bfcpbis-bfcp-websocket-05.txt
Thread-Index: AQHRBdZW9p6Pt0dHI0G5J5gRtUWM655p+f6AgDBfdwCAAS0sAIB/icyAgAmmyoCAAIfWgIAABQYAgAF3+ICAABEygIAH1LEA//+c5eI=
Date: Mon, 15 Feb 2016 19:15:37 +0000
Message-ID: <0F5FDA90-D389-4E02-A9F7-3E24CA9C3409@cisco.com>
References: <20151013164348.9920.89287.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> <6D74D935-2204-49AD-9CDA-D432A74BD477@cisco.com> <D26B6E1C.5EAA1%eckelcu@cisco.com> <D26CBA43.490B0%rmohanr@cisco.com> <D2D7B752.501D2%rmohanr@cisco.com> <D2DF8092.663D0%eckelcu@cisco.com> <A01A06CB-BCAE-45E8-9DF2-2F2F41005143@cisco.com> <7594FB04B1934943A5C02806D1A2204B37DC990A@ESESSMB209.ericsson.se> <B3EA2EA2-79DD-438C-AA25-9FDFB580D519@cisco.com>, <56BB90F3.1090405@alum.mit.edu>, <1455563420150.71088@cisco.com>
In-Reply-To: <1455563420150.71088@cisco.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-ms-exchange-transport-fromentityheader: Hosted
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="Windows-1252"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/bfcpbis/3QvwO_TwI-Ck8z3-F_68j_17xQM>
Cc: "Ram Mohan R \(rmohanr\)" <rmohanr@cisco.com>, "bfcpbis-chairs@tools.ietf.org" <bfcpbis-chairs@tools.ietf.org>, "bfcpbis@ietf.org" <bfcpbis@ietf.org>, "Charles Eckel \(eckelcu\)" <eckelcu@cisco.com>, Paul Kyzivat <pkyzivat@alum.mit.edu>, Christer Holmberg <christer.holmberg@ericsson.com>
Subject: Re: [bfcpbis] I-D Action: draft-ietf-bfcpbis-bfcp-websocket-05.txt
X-BeenThere: bfcpbis@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: BFCPBIS working group discussion list <bfcpbis.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/bfcpbis>, <mailto:bfcpbis-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/bfcpbis/>
List-Post: <mailto:bfcpbis@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:bfcpbis-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/bfcpbis>, <mailto:bfcpbis-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 15 Feb 2016 19:15:41 -0000

Hi Suhas - 

I think that is a reasonable approach. We'll add the categorization and associated text.

Thanks!

Gonzalo

Sent from my iPhone

> On Feb 15, 2016, at 2:10 PM, Suhas Nandakumar (snandaku) <snandaku@cisco.com> wrote:
> 
> Thanks Paul for bringing out the thinking of RTP over WebSockets. 
> I did had similar thoughts of a future possibility but wasn't sure if anyone would want to do though (given rtp over tcp itself is not a great user experience)
> 
> I am inclined towards NOT_RECOMMENDED as the mux category but adding note to explain something similar to Paul's explanation below shouldn't hurt either.
> This would ensure that the implementors of this draft are aware that the mux-category has been assigned due to lack of any use-cases in the foreseeable future
> 
> Please let me know your thoughts 
> 
> Thanks
> Suhas
> 
> 
> ________________________________________
> From: Paul Kyzivat <pkyzivat@alum.mit.edu>
> Sent: Wednesday, February 10, 2016 11:35 AM
> To: Gonzalo Salgueiro (gsalguei); Suhas Nandakumar (snandaku)
> Cc: Christer Holmberg; Charles Eckel (eckelcu); Ram Mohan R (rmohanr); bfcpbis@ietf.org; bfcpbis-chairs@tools.ietf.org
> Subject: Re: [bfcpbis] I-D Action: draft-ietf-bfcpbis-bfcp-websocket-05.txt
> 
>> On 2/10/16 1:33 PM, Gonzalo Salgueiro (gsalguei) wrote:
>> Paul/Suhas -
>> 
>> Could you share your thoughts on this so we know what document updates are required.
> 
> I guess the question is whether there is any case where a websocket
> makes sense in a bundle. My first thought was No. But on further
> thinking, ISTM that *in principle* it would be possible to run RTP over
> websocket. And then, since it makes sense to bundle RTP, it could also
> be possible to bundle websocket.
> 
> Of course to do this would first require a binding of RTP to websockets.
> Since you can already run RTP over TCP, it should be possible. (And
> easier, since the websocket provides the framing.)
> 
> Whether anybody would find reason to do so is another question. I doubt
> we will see it any time soon, and probably never.
> 
> *For now* I don't think there are any cases where it makes sense to use
> websocket in a bundle.
> 
> I'll leave it to Suhas to figure out what classification applies in this
> case.
> 
>        Thanks,
>        Paul
> 
>> Thanks,
>> 
>> Gonzalo
>> 
>> 
>>> On Feb 9, 2016, at 3:08 PM, Christer Holmberg <christer.holmberg@ericsson.com> wrote:
>>> 
>>> Hi,
>>> 
>>> In general I am fine with the latest versions of the draft.
>>> 
>>> However, in draft-ram-bfcpbis-sdp-ws-uri I think the mux category needs to be specified for the new SDP attributes.
>>> 
>>> Now, as I assume the attributes will never be used in a mux scenario, the question is which category shall be used. Suhas/Paul? NOT RECOMMENDED?
>>> 
>>> Regards,
>>> 
>>> Christer
>>> 
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: Gonzalo Salgueiro (gsalguei) [mailto:gsalguei@cisco.com]
>>> Sent: 09 February 2016 21:50
>>> To: Charles Eckel (eckelcu) <eckelcu@cisco.com>
>>> Cc: Ram Mohan R (rmohanr) <rmohanr@cisco.com>om>; bfcpbis@ietf.org; Christer Holmberg <christer.holmberg@ericsson.com>om>; bfcpbis-chairs@tools.ietf.org
>>> Subject: Re: [bfcpbis] I-D Action: draft-ietf-bfcpbis-bfcp-websocket-05.txt
>>> 
>>> Thanks, Charles.
>>> 
>>> We’re awaiting sign-off from Christer that his points on both drafts are properly addressed.  Once that happens there are no more open issues.
>>> 
>>> Two comments:
>>> 
>>> - We think draft-ietf-bfcpbis-bfcp-websocket is ready for WGLC
>>> - We’d appreciate some direction from the chairs on how to move forward the new draft (draft-ram-bfcpbis-sdp-ws-uri) that was spawned from this effort, which we also believe is ready for WGLC.
>>> 
>>> Thanks,
>>> 
>>> Gonzalo
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>>> On Feb 9, 2016, at 2:43 PM, Charles Eckel (eckelcu) <eckelcu@cisco.com> wrote:
>>>> 
>>>> Ram and other draft authors,
>>>> 
>>>> Thanks for updating and posting the revised draft ( https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-bfcpbis-bfcp-websocket-06 ).
>>>> I would like to poll the working group to see if people think this draft is now ready for WGLC.
>>>> 
>>>> Thanks,
>>>> Charles
>>>> 
>>>>> On 2/3/16, 12:20 AM, "Ram Mohan R (rmohanr)" <rmohanr@cisco.com> wrote:
>>>>> 
>>>>> Hi Charles / WG,
>>>>> 
>>>>> We have published a new revision of draft-ietf-bfcpbis-bfcp-websocket
>>>>> and also draft-ram-bfcpbis-sdp-ws-uri which addresses the comments
>>>>> given by Christer
>>>>> (https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/bfcpbis/S_MlYOJz-kkE3yLu5IANL9
>>>>> 3ndmM)
>>>>> 
>>>>> Regards,
>>>>> Ram
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>>> From: bfcpbis <bfcpbis-bounces@ietf.org> on behalf of Cisco Employee
>>>>> <rmohanr@cisco.com>
>>>>> Date: Saturday, 14 November 2015 at 10:12 AM
>>>>> To: "Charles Eckel (eckelcu)" <eckelcu@cisco.com>om>, "Gonzalo Salgueiro
>>>>> (gsalguei)" <gsalguei@cisco.com>om>, "bfcpbis@ietf.org"
>>>>> <bfcpbis@ietf.org>rg>, "christer.holmberg@ericsson.com"
>>>>> <christer.holmberg@ericsson.com>
>>>>> Cc: "bfcpbis-chairs@tools.ietf.org" <bfcpbis-chairs@tools.ietf.org>
>>>>> Subject: Re: [bfcpbis] I-D Action:
>>>>> draft-ietf-bfcpbis-bfcp-websocket-05.txt
>>>>> 
>>>>>> Hi Charles,
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> I will get back with responses and updated diffs to
>>>>>> draft-ram-bfcpbis-sdp-ws-uri soon. I agree that we should wait till
>>>>>> this is resolved before looking to start WGLC.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Regards,
>>>>>> Ram
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>>>> From: "Charles Eckel (eckelcu)" <eckelcu@cisco.com>
>>>>>> Date: Saturday, 14 November 2015 12:14 am
>>>>>> To: "Gonzalo Salgueiro (gsalguei)" <gsalguei@cisco.com>om>,
>>>>>> "bfcpbis@ietf.org" <bfcpbis@ietf.org>rg>, "christer.holmberg@ericsson.com"
>>>>>> <christer.holmberg@ericsson.com>
>>>>>> Cc: "bfcpbis-chairs@tools.ietf.org" <bfcpbis-chairs@tools.ietf.org>rg>,
>>>>>> Cisco Employee <rmohanr@cisco.com>
>>>>>> Subject: Re: [bfcpbis] I-D Action:
>>>>>> draft-ietf-bfcpbis-bfcp-websocket-05.txt
>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> Christer reviewed draft-ram-bfcpbis-sdp-ws-uri and recommended
>>>>>>> substantial changes to it. The authors have not yet responded to
>>>>>>> that.
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> Regarding draft-ietf-bfcpbis-bfcp-websocket, I¹d like to see this
>>>>>>> response and potential impacts on either/both drafts before
>>>>>>> starting WGLC for draft-ietf-bfcpbis-bfcp-websocket.
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> Cheers,
>>>>>>> Charles
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> On 10/13/15, 10:02 AM, "bfcpbis on behalf of Gonzalo Salgueiro
>>>>>>> (gsalguei)"
>>>>>>> <bfcpbis-bounces@ietf.org on behalf of gsalguei@cisco.com> wrote:
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> New version of the draft has been published and addresses all open
>>>>>>>> comments raised by Christer.  At this point authors feel this is
>>>>>>>> ready for WGLC.
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> There is a pending request for Christer to review the
>>>>>>>> complementary draft he requested
>>>>>>>> (draft-ram-bfcpbis-sdp-ws-uri-00) be split off from the original
>>>>>>>> document. Once this is done, we ask the chairs for guidance on how
>>>>>>>> best to progress this spin-off draft.
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> Gonzalo
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> On Oct 13, 2015, at 12:43 PM, internet-drafts@ietf.org wrote:
>>>>>>>>> A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line
>>>>>>>>> Internet-Drafts directories.
>>>>>>>>> This draft is a work item of the Binary Floor Control Protocol
>>>>>>>>> Bis Working Group of the IETF.
>>>>>>>>>        Title           : The WebSocket Protocol as a Transport for the
>>>>>>>>> Binary Floor Control Protocol (BFCP)
>>>>>>>>>        Authors         : Victor Pascual
>>>>>>>>>                          Antón Román
>>>>>>>>>                          Stéphane Cazeaux
>>>>>>>>>                          Gonzalo Salgueiro
>>>>>>>>>                          Ram Mohan Ravindranath
>>>>>>>>>                          Sergio Garcia Murillo
>>>>>>>>> Filename        : draft-ietf-bfcpbis-bfcp-websocket-05.txt
>>>>>>>>> Pages           : 14
>>>>>>>>> Date            : 2015-10-13
>>>>>>>>> Abstract:
>>>>>>>>>   The WebSocket protocol enables two-way realtime communication
>>>>>>>>> between
>>>>>>>>>   clients and servers.  This document specifies a new WebSocket sub-
>>>>>>>>>   protocol as a reliable transport mechanism between Binary Floor
>>>>>>>>>   Control Protocol (BFCP) entities to enable usage of BFCP in new
>>>>>>>>>   scenarios.
>>>>>>>>> The IETF datatracker status page for this draft is:
>>>>>>>>> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-bfcpbis-bfcp-websocke
>>>>>>>>> t/ There's also a htmlized version available at:
>>>>>>>>> https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-bfcpbis-bfcp-websocket-05
>>>>>>>>> A diff from the previous version is available at:
>>>>>>>>> https://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=draft-ietf-bfcpbis-bfcp-websock
>>>>>>>>> et-05 Please note that it may take a couple of minutes from the
>>>>>>>>> time of submission until the htmlized version and diff are
>>>>>>>>> available at tools.ietf.org.
>>>>>>>>> Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP at:
>>>>>>>>> ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/
>>>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>>>> bfcpbis mailing list
>>>>>>>>> bfcpbis@ietf.org
>>>>>>>>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/bfcpbis
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>>> bfcpbis mailing list
>>>>>>>> bfcpbis@ietf.org
>>>>>>>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/bfcpbis
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>> bfcpbis mailing list
>>>>>> bfcpbis@ietf.org
>>>>>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/bfcpbis
>