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

["Ram Mohan R (rmohanr)" <[e-mail]>]

Thanks Paul/Suhas for your feedback.

We have published a new revision with the changes-
https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ram-bfcpbis-sdp-ws-uri-03

Regards,
Ram

-----Original Message-----
From: Paul Kyzivat <[e-mail]>
Date: Tuesday, 16 February 2016 at 1:16 AM
To: "Suhas Nandakumar (snandaku)" <[e-mail]>, "Gonzalo Salgueiro
(gsalguei)" <[e-mail]>
Cc: Christer Holmberg <[e-mail]>, "Charles Eckel
(eckelcu)" <[e-mail]>, Cisco Employee <[e-mail]>,
"[e-mail]" <[e-mail]>, "[e-mail]"
<[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: [bfcpbis] I-D Action: draft-ietf-bfcpbis-bfcp-websocket-05.txt

>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 <[e-mail]>
>> 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);
>>[e-mail]; [e-mail]
>> 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
>>>><[e-mail]> 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:[e-mail]]
>>>> Sent: 09 February 2016 21:50
>>>> To: Charles Eckel (eckelcu) <[e-mail]>
>>>> Cc: Ram Mohan R (rmohanr) <[e-mail]>; [e-mail];
>>>>Christer Holmberg <[e-mail]>;
>>>>[e-mail]
>>>> 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)
>>>>><[e-mail]> 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)" <[e-mail]>
>>>>>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 <[e-mail]> on behalf of Cisco Employee
>>>>>> <[e-mail]>
>>>>>> Date: Saturday, 14 November 2015 at 10:12 AM
>>>>>> To: "Charles Eckel (eckelcu)" <[e-mail]>, "Gonzalo
>>>>>>Salgueiro
>>>>>> (gsalguei)" <[e-mail]>, "[e-mail]"
>>>>>> <[e-mail]>, "[e-mail]"
>>>>>> <[e-mail]>
>>>>>> Cc: "[e-mail]" <[e-mail]>
>>>>>> 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)" <[e-mail]>
>>>>>>> Date: Saturday, 14 November 2015 12:14 am
>>>>>>> To: "Gonzalo Salgueiro (gsalguei)" <[e-mail]>,
>>>>>>> "[e-mail]" <[e-mail]>,
>>>>>>>"[e-mail]"
>>>>>>> <[e-mail]>
>>>>>>> Cc: "[e-mail]"
>>>>>>><[e-mail]>,
>>>>>>> Cisco Employee <[e-mail]>
>>>>>>> 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)"
>>>>>>>> <[e-mail] on behalf of [e-mail]> 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, [e-mail] 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
>>>>>>>>>> [e-mail]
>>>>>>>>>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/bfcpbis
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>>>> bfcpbis mailing list
>>>>>>>>> [e-mail]
>>>>>>>>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/bfcpbis
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>> bfcpbis mailing list
>>>>>>> [e-mail]
>>>>>>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/bfcpbis
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>