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

Paul Kyzivat <pkyzivat@alum.mit.edu> Mon, 15 February 2016 19:46 UTC

Return-Path: <pkyzivat@alum.mit.edu>
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 4AE131A00A1 for <bfcpbis@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 15 Feb 2016 11:46:37 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.235
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.235 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, SPF_SOFTFAIL=0.665] autolearn=no
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 pM78hOK3SoCn for <bfcpbis@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 15 Feb 2016 11:46:34 -0800 (PST)
Received: from resqmta-ch2-08v.sys.comcast.net (resqmta-ch2-08v.sys.comcast.net [IPv6:2001:558:fe21:29:69:252:207:40]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 966A61A00A3 for <bfcpbis@ietf.org>; Mon, 15 Feb 2016 11:46:31 -0800 (PST)
Received: from resomta-ch2-08v.sys.comcast.net ([69.252.207.104]) by resqmta-ch2-08v.sys.comcast.net with comcast id JjmU1s0052Fh1PH01jmX7f; Mon, 15 Feb 2016 19:46:31 +0000
Received: from Paul-Kyzivats-MacBook-Pro.local ([73.218.51.154]) by resomta-ch2-08v.sys.comcast.net with comcast id JjmV1s0173KdFy101jmWPd; Mon, 15 Feb 2016 19:46:31 +0000
To: "Suhas Nandakumar (snandaku)" <snandaku@cisco.com>, "Gonzalo Salgueiro (gsalguei)" <gsalguei@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>
From: Paul Kyzivat <pkyzivat@alum.mit.edu>
Message-ID: <56C22B15.5000208@alum.mit.edu>
Date: Mon, 15 Feb 2016 14:46:29 -0500
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.10; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/38.5.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <1455563420150.71088@cisco.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=comcast.net; s=q20140121; t=1455565591; bh=q64tZffzy6mqNSOEYw6ios1/PR+pb5s2A012VZX6mPM=; h=Received:Received:Subject:To:From:Message-ID:Date:MIME-Version: Content-Type; b=ZBEsU4cuWZSCFee899cgW6bIjpYt1Qx9Kb1UPAl4VAzxKz2Q3mGk/zxBGlwWFQqVq qb+kXLVBEeuu/PWQdHay8jyGocpGKiqQWB+1gwNs06gNitYHZeJoachpZlHRmAU+W4 cwJbkJZYOAJ0WMNWVFvFI5xLzOHwNgOHpRigp9shBMSixCMeKVk3gr0S9pYT1n+SUF nAFyIv0MqceAvvspgF6Lu76o1xxc0LWYyE0Hdx/PglGT04iUJGYjKvL4k1z3RZg5Mq qDoQmMUOhL0Eyr+rSS21MLghTctIHO6ye1519ARCjC/fV9lfcy+utVL1pT4khphJDG K+J1D360emnuA==
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/bfcpbis/8Yn8qlQo_ce3lK_SjpritKyLiDU>
Cc: "Ram Mohan R \(rmohanr\)" <rmohanr@cisco.com>, "bfcpbis@ietf.org" <bfcpbis@ietf.org>, "bfcpbis-chairs@tools.ietf.org" <bfcpbis-chairs@tools.ietf.org>, "Charles Eckel \(eckelcu\)" <eckelcu@cisco.com>, 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 19:46:37 -0000

WFM

On 2/15/16 2:10 PM, Suhas Nandakumar (snandaku) 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
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>
>>
>
>