Re: [rtcweb] A plea for simplicity, marketability - and... who are we designing RTCWEB for?

Harald Alvestrand <harald@alvestrand.no> Sun, 23 October 2011 07:38 UTC

Return-Path: <harald@alvestrand.no>
X-Original-To: rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 59A4521F8AF6 for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 23 Oct 2011 00:38:34 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -110.542
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-110.542 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.057, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-8, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
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 4K84EGz1CLj0 for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 23 Oct 2011 00:38:33 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from eikenes.alvestrand.no (eikenes.alvestrand.no [158.38.152.233]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 811F621F8AF4 for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Sun, 23 Oct 2011 00:38:33 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by eikenes.alvestrand.no (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1C90639E0D2 for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Sun, 23 Oct 2011 09:31:23 +0200 (CEST)
X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at eikenes.alvestrand.no
Received: from eikenes.alvestrand.no ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (eikenes.alvestrand.no [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id augJntMzK9dD for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Sun, 23 Oct 2011 09:31:21 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from [192.168.1.16] (162.80-203-220.nextgentel.com [80.203.220.162]) by eikenes.alvestrand.no (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 555CF39E072 for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Sun, 23 Oct 2011 09:31:21 +0200 (CEST)
Message-ID: <4EA3C324.8050309@alvestrand.no>
Date: Sun, 23 Oct 2011 09:32:52 +0200
From: Harald Alvestrand <harald@alvestrand.no>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.9.2.23) Gecko/20110922 Thunderbird/3.1.15
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: rtcweb@ietf.org
References: <9C8CA816-65FB-41A0-999C-4C43128CAAB4@danyork.org> <2E239D6FCD033C4BAF15F386A979BF51159B91@sonusinmail02.sonusnet.com> <CAAJUQMjHOJxCUGTwON9PmK-QEN0jM++RTWuRpmsHS-eszcNkXQ@mail.gmail.com> <4EA1B9E5.8030507@jesup.org> <CALiegf=7AUs2T8dTbdBpAH7Am6mDSP3LDbXB9BszorUdSoG0Pg@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CALiegf=7AUs2T8dTbdBpAH7Am6mDSP3LDbXB9BszorUdSoG0Pg@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Subject: Re: [rtcweb] A plea for simplicity, marketability - and... who are we designing RTCWEB for?
X-BeenThere: rtcweb@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: Real-Time Communication in WEB-browsers working group list <rtcweb.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/rtcweb>, <mailto:rtcweb-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/rtcweb>
List-Post: <mailto:rtcweb@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:rtcweb-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rtcweb>, <mailto:rtcweb-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 23 Oct 2011 07:38:34 -0000

On 10/21/2011 09:04 PM, Iñaki Baz Castillo wrote:
> 2011/10/21 Randell Jesup<randell-ietf@jesup.org>;:
>> This is the rough equivalent to saying "instead of exchanging email in a standard format, and letting people use whatever client/webmail-client they want to read it; if you want to read an email from a gmail user you should log into gmail using their interface; from an aol user log into AOL and their interface, etc.
> This is because SMTP is a successful protocol that exists from long
> time ago and allows each user to have a globaly reachable
> identificator (a mailto: URI).
Note (speaking as an emai veteran): These are 3 points (successful, 
existed for a long time, and allows a globally reachable ID). As of 
~1992, I don't believe that any of them were uncontroversial.
It took a lot of engineering work to get to where they were obvious truths.
>   Will RTCweb define an unique
> identificator for each user in the world? Not at all. RTCweb will be
> implemented by independent websites, so each website decides the
> identificator grammar of its users. Please don't try to make analogy
> between SMTP and RTCweb because it's not the same.
RTCWEB won't, but SIP and XMPP already have. If people deploy 
applications that implement SIP or XMPP on top of RTCWEB, one of them 
might eventually turn out to be "obvious" in the same way.

That's a hope of many, but far from the only use case for RTCWEB.