Re: [ppsp] re-charter issue discussion(cont'):transport mechanism
"Y. Richard Yang" <yry@cs.yale.edu> Fri, 30 March 2012 18:52 UTC
Return-Path: <yry@cs.yale.edu>
X-Original-To: ppsp@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ppsp@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 95F1621F84C5 for <ppsp@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 30 Mar 2012 11:52:24 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: 0.804
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.804 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.718, BAYES_00=-2.599, HTML_FONT_FACE_BAD=0.884, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, J_CHICKENPOX_31=0.6, J_CHICKENPOX_63=0.6, J_CHICKENPOX_64=0.6]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id P3cQfAFXO7LA for <ppsp@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 30 Mar 2012 11:52:23 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from vm-emlprdomr-05.its.yale.edu (vm-emlprdomr-05.its.yale.edu [130.132.50.146]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6FF8F21F84BF for <ppsp@ietf.org>; Fri, 30 Mar 2012 11:52:23 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from dhcp-128-36-59-108.central.yale.edu (dhcp-128-36-59-108.central.yale.edu [128.36.59.108]) (authenticated bits=0) by vm-emlprdomr-05.its.yale.edu (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id q2UIqL4P000702 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NOT); Fri, 30 Mar 2012 14:52:21 -0400
Message-ID: <4F7600E5.4000301@cs.yale.edu>
Date: Fri, 30 Mar 2012 14:52:21 -0400
From: "Y. Richard Yang" <yry@cs.yale.edu>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.7; rv:11.0) Gecko/20120327 Thunderbird/11.0.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: ppsp@ietf.org
References: <2012033016511639412036@chinamobile.com>, <B0D29E0424F2DE47A0B36779EC66677916CE724C@szxeml504-mbs.china.huawei.com> <201203301806120605785@chinamobile.com>
In-Reply-To: <201203301806120605785@chinamobile.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="------------050400040105090808020809"
X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.71 on 130.132.50.146
Subject: Re: [ppsp] re-charter issue discussion(cont'):transport mechanism
X-BeenThere: ppsp@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: discussing to draw up peer to peer streaming protocol <ppsp.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/ppsp>, <mailto:ppsp-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/ppsp>
List-Post: <mailto:ppsp@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ppsp-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ppsp>, <mailto:ppsp-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 30 Mar 2012 18:52:24 -0000
Hi all, I consider browsers as one major platform for the deployment of P2P streaming clients. We have a browser (Flash based though) P2P streaming system, and recent large trial experiences are quite positive. So I support that if PPSP can use RTCWeb transport, it is a good plus. Richard On 3/30/12 6:06 AM, zhangyunfei wrote: > I think in RTCWeb they are indeed discussing the peer browser > scenarios. But I guess this is not a large scale P2P usage, aka, some > tens is already a very large amount in RTCweb(like conferencening). > BR > Yunfei > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > zhangyunfei > *From:* ZongNing <mailto:zongning@huawei.com> > *Date:* 2012-03-30 17:50 > *To:* zhangyunfei <mailto:zhangyunfei@chinamobile.com>; ppsp > <mailto:ppsp@ietf.org> > *Subject:* RE: [ppsp] re-charter issue discussion(cont'):transport > mechanism > > Hi, Yunfei, > > I think it is related if RTCWeb includes the scenario of one > browser streaming video to others by using P2P way. > > Also start discussing P2P use case in RTCWeb (or discussing web-brower > usage in PPSP) might be interesting. > > -Ning > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > *From:* ppsp-bounces@ietf.org [ppsp-bounces@ietf.org] on behalf of > zhangyunfei [zhangyunfei@chinamobile.com] > *Sent:* Friday, March 30, 2012 4:53 PM > *To:* ppsp > *Subject:* [ppsp] re-charter issue discussion(cont'):transport mechanism > > Hi all, > To continue the re-charter discussion in PPSP WG meeting, I would > like to discuss more on the transport mechanism issue. > I happen to know in RTCWeb, the transport protocol between two > peer browsers seems to been decided: For media part, srtp/rtp over > UDP(I am not quite sure of if it is accurate). For data transmit, > Datagrams over SCTP over DTLS over UDP. > My question is: If this related to PPSP transport mechanism? Or > totally two different things?Any different requirements? Just to > provide such info to incur discussion. > BR > Yunfei > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > zhangyunfei > > > _______________________________________________ > ppsp mailing list > ppsp@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ppsp
- [ppsp] re-charter issue discussion(cont'):transpo… zhangyunfei
- Re: [ppsp] re-charter issue discussion(cont'):tra… ZongNing
- Re: [ppsp] re-charter issue discussion(cont'):tra… zhangyunfei
- Re: [ppsp] re-charter issue discussion(cont'):tra… Y. Richard Yang
- Re: [ppsp] re-charter issue discussion(cont'):tra… Arno Bakker
- Re: [ppsp] re-charter issue discussion(cont'):tra… Wesley Eddy