[MMUSIC] draft-ietf-mmusic-sctp-sdp: a concern from CLUE
Paul Kyzivat <pkyzivat@alum.mit.edu> Wed, 10 October 2012 21:17 UTC
Return-Path: <pkyzivat@alum.mit.edu>
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 1E7FA21F8607 for <mmusic@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 10 Oct 2012 14:17:49 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -0.382
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.382 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.055, BAYES_00=-2.599, FH_RELAY_NODNS=1.451, HELO_MISMATCH_NET=0.611, RDNS_NONE=0.1]
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 MZMOsAd+ea3B for <mmusic@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 10 Oct 2012 14:17:48 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from qmta05.westchester.pa.mail.comcast.net (qmta05.westchester.pa.mail.comcast.net [IPv6:2001:558:fe14:43:76:96:62:48]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 38C8F21F8594 for <mmusic@ietf.org>; Wed, 10 Oct 2012 14:17:48 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from omta06.westchester.pa.mail.comcast.net ([76.96.62.51]) by qmta05.westchester.pa.mail.comcast.net with comcast id 9RUd1k00616LCl055ZHsC6; Wed, 10 Oct 2012 21:17:52 +0000
Received: from Paul-Kyzivats-MacBook-Pro.local ([50.138.229.164]) by omta06.westchester.pa.mail.comcast.net with comcast id 9ZCQ1k0093ZTu2S3SZCQ5D; Wed, 10 Oct 2012 21:12:24 +0000
Message-ID: <5075E4CE.7000108@alum.mit.edu>
Date: Wed, 10 Oct 2012 17:12:46 -0400
From: Paul Kyzivat <pkyzivat@alum.mit.edu>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.7; rv:15.0) Gecko/20120907 Thunderbird/15.0.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: mmusic@ietf.org
References: <50728B01.5060405@ericsson.com>
In-Reply-To: <50728B01.5060405@ericsson.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Subject: [MMUSIC] draft-ietf-mmusic-sctp-sdp: a concern from CLUE
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: Wed, 10 Oct 2012 21:17:49 -0000
In the clue wg we have need for a data channel for some application level signaling. While not yet settled, we have a strong interest in using the same SCTP over DTLS mechanism that RTCWEB is using. We have a couple of reasons for that: - it meets our needs for a reliable channel - rtcweb is doing the work of defining a mechanism that will work through NATs, etc. - we want to make it possible to implement clue in a webrtc client. But we don't want to require that clue be implemented over webrtc! As far as we can see now, clue will only need a single channel. An webrtc implementation of clue will need to use the webrtc APIs to request a channel for clue use. But a native sip implementation of clue won't have the webrtc APIs. In sip the natural way to assign something like this would be via SDP. The bottom line for me is that there should be a mechanism via SDP to negotiate some SCTP channels for particular uses. If webrtc also wants to support dynamic assignment of channels, then the SDP mechanism could be used to negotiate a channel over which a dynamic assignment protocol can be run. I realize this is a bit messy. I don't know whether it is better discussed in MMUSIC or RTCWEB. Thanks, Paul On 10/8/12 4:12 AM, Salvatore Loreto wrote: > Hi there, > > there has been a quite large discussion within the rtcweb mailing list and > especially the w3c webrtc mailing list. > > Some of the points discussed are specific of how to negotiate the > 'datachannel' protocol over SDP, > and I lean on putting those in a separate draft and not in this one. > > However there are things that are general enough to is worth to insert > in this draft > as they can be used in other protocols that eventually will be specified > in the future > running on top of SCTP, or STCP over DTLS. > > 'streams' is some of those attributes, > so I am proposing to insert in the new version of the draft the > following text > > xxx. Streams Attribute > > The 'streams' attribute indicates time the number of streams to be supported by the association. > If this attribute is not present, the implementation should provide a default, with a suggested value > of 16. > > > streams-attr = "a=streams:" streamsnumbers > streamsnumbers =1*DIGIT > > > As I said, all the other attributes that has been discussed are tied to > the 'datachannel' protocol identifier ( to be registered?), > which is describing the format of the media... so they should go in a > different draft. > > opinion, thoughts are welcome and required > > thanks > Salvatore > > -- > Salvatore Loreto, PhD > www.sloreto.com > > > > _______________________________________________ > mmusic mailing list > mmusic@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mmusic >
- [MMUSIC] updating draft-ietf-mmusic-sctp-sdp Salvatore Loreto
- Re: [MMUSIC] updating draft-ietf-mmusic-sctp-sdp Paul Kyzivat
- [MMUSIC] draft-ietf-mmusic-sctp-sdp: a concern fr… Paul Kyzivat
- Re: [MMUSIC] updating draft-ietf-mmusic-sctp-sdp Salvatore Loreto
- Re: [MMUSIC] draft-ietf-mmusic-sctp-sdp: a concer… Salvatore Loreto
- Re: [MMUSIC] updating draft-ietf-mmusic-sctp-sdp Paul Kyzivat
- Re: [MMUSIC] draft-ietf-mmusic-sctp-sdp: a concer… Paul Kyzivat