Re: [rtcweb] Reg retransmissions using JSEP approach.

Harald Alvestrand <harald@alvestrand.no> Sun, 10 June 2012 21:47 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 A80DA21F854B for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 10 Jun 2012 14:47:05 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -110.598
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-110.598 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, 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 p8bmKv9Yy5Gj for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 10 Jun 2012 14:47:05 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from eikenes.alvestrand.no (eikenes.alvestrand.no [158.38.152.233]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C5A3021F8543 for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Sun, 10 Jun 2012 14:47:04 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by eikenes.alvestrand.no (Postfix) with ESMTP id EB6C339E106 for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Sun, 10 Jun 2012 23:47:18 +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 dZVbK2eAtbEy for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Sun, 10 Jun 2012 23:47:17 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from [192.168.11.193] (c213-89-143-9.bredband.comhem.se [213.89.143.9]) by eikenes.alvestrand.no (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 0A19639E056 for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Sun, 10 Jun 2012 23:47:17 +0200 (CEST)
Message-ID: <4FD515D4.3000908@alvestrand.no>
Date: Sun, 10 Jun 2012 23:47:00 +0200
From: Harald Alvestrand <harald@alvestrand.no>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux i686; rv:11.0) Gecko/20120411 Thunderbird/11.0.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: rtcweb@ietf.org
References: <CAGW1TF5mSM=OFaFJE9JQBrYCYRV7Ur=RrZhV5XDbxf3F_Tdd_Q@mail.gmail.com> <13D57612-5ADF-4B23-B7A4-81B212D49C66@iii.ca>
In-Reply-To: <13D57612-5ADF-4B23-B7A4-81B212D49C66@iii.ca>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="------------090304060605000509070702"
Subject: Re: [rtcweb] Reg retransmissions using JSEP approach.
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, 10 Jun 2012 21:47:05 -0000

An implementation of ROAP on top of JSEP (-00) is available here:

http://code.google.com/p/webrtc-samples/source/browse/#svn%2Ftrunk%2Froap-jsep

One of the areas in which it is incomplete is retransmissions....

On 06/10/2012 04:21 PM, Cullen Jennings wrote:
> On Jun 9, 2012, at 7:26 , kiran kumar wrote:
>
>> Hi all,
>>
>> I am new to this list, so please don't mind if I am repeating the same question, if it has already discussed in this list.
>>
>> My doubt is regarding how JSEP style of implementation will differentiate the retransmission of messges with out ROAP.
>>
>> According to few mails and discussion lists, It is specified that ROAP is going to be replaced by JSEP.
>> But in updated JSEP draft an example with ROAP is also provided.
>>
>> If ROAP is going to be replaced by JSEP, which part of JSEP will differentiate the retransmitted offers.
>> ROAP is having "seq" field to differentiate it.
>> Is that part going to be completely left to the application protocol ?
>>
> Yes, I think the idea i the application would have to deal with that. It probably needs to keep track of the keeping between the offer / answers to the seq number too so that if an offer is rejected and it rolls back to reg previous offer, it has that offer so it can roll back. At the same time browser implementation  also need to keep track of the various offers so they can roll back. More text is needed in the drafts on all this.
>
> _______________________________________________
> rtcweb mailing list
> rtcweb@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rtcweb