Re: [MMUSIC] SDP work needed for WebRTC stuff

Ted Hardie <ted.ietf@gmail.com> Mon, 10 December 2012 17:36 UTC

Return-Path: <ted.ietf@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: mmusic@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: mmusic@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E5C4621F857C; Mon, 10 Dec 2012 09:36:29 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -3.428
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.428 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.170, BAYES_00=-2.599, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id fjH-XKqeZ24N; Mon, 10 Dec 2012 09:36:28 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-vc0-f172.google.com (mail-vc0-f172.google.com [209.85.220.172]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 89E9F21F856D; Mon, 10 Dec 2012 09:36:28 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-vc0-f172.google.com with SMTP id fw7so3018030vcb.31 for <multiple recipients>; Mon, 10 Dec 2012 09:36:28 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type; bh=Foi2RanzwiqbE5WYY2GLyDI0tPPDtH5H9TNrQoRLccY=; b=yqa4qZAWc6Ad7bSYFMVqrgX0Cr3KqcNk6smYVtKsXxK7umlUIP8a5qtuia5lfQbKfT 3UOOozUW1mGE5LXmwx96DOllwdB6zhsFYl8ROMztRDUrLCyaXJG/GTdLdUMOBXzL/fO+ CA815yCQ9jFazdK+S5OV31Euyzkb5QeDGV+qFcbiYkfFuBhlr/X6O772zWuAAlttamfW Epxn6xaRCC5BkThdH1RmXtOtyU4WTF+4EZYYYAc0n+H6aGeR46D3rU+f9pVHiKjqcKSN 4a3u3WbYmngdOSkSxH+PzKW00smtb6uABGc2uu06iQNZwmTmEW36Q+g5JUfPB5pjuRcL +CNg==
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.52.36.167 with SMTP id r7mr8190625vdj.108.1355160987960; Mon, 10 Dec 2012 09:36:27 -0800 (PST)
Received: by 10.58.164.35 with HTTP; Mon, 10 Dec 2012 09:36:27 -0800 (PST)
In-Reply-To: <EDC0A1AE77C57744B664A310A0B23AE20D74247E9C@FRMRSSXCHMBSC3.dc-m.alcatel-lucent.com>
References: <C5E08FE080ACFD4DAE31E4BDBF944EB1132A380B@xmb-aln-x02.cisco.com> <CABcZeBPfhKoDvHceNLo_Ab9rRDD0V-mMok4H4y_FitYcBZ7vTA@mail.gmail.com> <C5E08FE080ACFD4DAE31E4BDBF944EB1132A5D53@xmb-aln-x02.cisco.com> <EDC0A1AE77C57744B664A310A0B23AE20D74247E9C@FRMRSSXCHMBSC3.dc-m.alcatel-lucent.com>
Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2012 09:36:27 -0800
Message-ID: <CA+9kkMASrAGvAEY7aU5H1CjVqBj0bQfkXr3XdBmO8M-FQNGS0Q@mail.gmail.com>
From: Ted Hardie <ted.ietf@gmail.com>
To: "DRAGE, Keith (Keith)" <keith.drage@alcatel-lucent.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="20cf30780ca44d069a04d08301c7"
Cc: "Cullen Jennings (fluffy)" <fluffy@cisco.com>, "<rtcweb@ietf.org>" <rtcweb@ietf.org>, mmusic WG <mmusic@ietf.org>, "<public-webrtc@w3.org>" <public-webrtc@w3.org>
Subject: Re: [MMUSIC] SDP work needed for WebRTC stuff
X-BeenThere: mmusic@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: Multiparty Multimedia Session Control Working Group <mmusic.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/mmusic>, <mailto:mmusic-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/mmusic>
List-Post: <mailto:mmusic@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:mmusic-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mmusic>, <mailto:mmusic-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2012 17:36:30 -0000

On Mon, Dec 10, 2012 at 5:16 AM, DRAGE, Keith (Keith) <
keith.drage@alcatel-lucent.com> wrote:

> This is not just MMUSIC, there are bits of AVTCORE and AVTEXT
> responsibility in there as well.
>
> And I don't see how you can suddenly extend the interim of RTCWEB to the
> scope of other working groups, without even having a discussion with all
> the relevant chairs.
>
>
That's not how I read the overall sentiment--people are simply saying that
they need this work done and are willing to put in the effort to get it
done.  It would, in fact, be ideal if some of the MMUSIC questions were
resolve *before* an RTCWEB/WEBRTC interim, as we can then work through what
is decided.

Put another way, I take it as encouragement to MMUSIC folks that they would
find a January virtual interim very well received/attended.

Ted



> I'd further note that Jonathan Lennox has an action (with the support of
> quite a number of other people) to produce an internet draft on trying to
> sort out the terminology concents that exist within RTP at the moment. This
> would be the basis for progressing a number of these issues. That would
> probably have to be an RAI wide draft.
>
> There has been some progress on this - maybe Jonathan can report on where
> this now is. I know he was waiting on volunteers for some of the sections
> and on input from others where volunteers already existed.
>
> Keith
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: mmusic-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:mmusic-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf
> > Of Cullen Jennings (fluffy)
> > Sent: 09 December 2012 00:20
> > To: Eric Rescorla
> > Cc: <rtcweb@ietf.org>; mmusic WG; <public-webrtc@w3.org>
> > Subject: Re: [MMUSIC] SDP work needed for WebRTC stuff
> >
> >
> > On Dec 8, 2012, at 4:21 PM, Eric Rescorla <ekr@rtfm.com> wrote:
> >
> > > +rtcweb
> > >
> > > On Sat, Dec 8, 2012 at 2:41 PM, Cullen Jennings (fluffy)
> > <fluffy@cisco.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > I was looking over everything that needs to be completed to finish a
> > fist cut of the WebRTC related work. There are a handful of big SDP
> > problems that are currently blocking some of the WebRTC work and I'd like
> > to figure out how to make some progress on them.
> > >
> > > Let me loosely characterize them as
> > >
> > > 1) If we have several video streams, how do theses map up to 1 or more
> m
> > lines.
> > >
> > > 2) if we are doing port multiplexing, what does the SDP look like (the
> > bundle problem)
> > >
> > > 3) How do we map the RTCWeb track and stream label concepts to
> > identifiers in SDP
> > >
> > > 3) SDP for application running over SCTP/DTLS
> > >
> > > I don't want to speak for all the various chairs but I am under the
> > impression that most of chairs of related groups in W3C and IETF believe
> > these are issues that need to be resolved primarily in the MMUSIC WG and
> > that they impact both WebRTC and CLUE as well as the general long term
> use
> > of SDP in SIP and other protocols.
> > >
> > > I'd like to get some discussion going on how we can make some progress
> > on these. I don't think we are going to solve these in 20 minutes of
> > discussion at an IETF meeting so I think we probably need some interim
> > (virtual or face to face) to sort this out.
> > >
> > > Thoughts?
> > >
> > > Wow, I'm totally confused here.
> > >
> > > I had assumed that the SDP-related issues were going to be the main
> > > topics at the WebRTC/RTCWEB interim in January. Is that not the case?
> >
> > So far the interim was only talking about being a WebRTC & RTCWeb so this
> > SDP stuff would be out of scope. Perhaps it would be better to have some
> > of the time for mmusic topics?
> >
> >
> > >
> > > IMO the lack of clarity around how to encode various media
> > > configurations into SDP is the major thing blocking progress here. In
> > > particular, Firefox has opted not to implement multiplexing of media
> > > streams over the same transport flow (whether of the bundle or
> > > multiple m-line variety) until the SDP for it is well-defined. The
> > > same thing applies to the question of how to map multiple m-lines to
> > > incoming MediaStreams/Tracks.
> > >
> > > We really need to cover these issues in the interim.
> > >
> > > -Ekr
> > >
> > >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > mmusic mailing list
> > mmusic@ietf.org
> > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mmusic
> _______________________________________________
> mmusic mailing list
> mmusic@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mmusic
>