Re: [rtcweb] SDP Offer/Answer draft-jennings-rtcweb-signaling - Scope

Christer Holmberg <christer.holmberg@ericsson.com> Tue, 18 October 2011 10:47 UTC

Return-Path: <christer.holmberg@ericsson.com>
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 7F34821F8C13 for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 18 Oct 2011 03:47:44 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -6.388
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.388 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.089, BAYES_00=-2.599, MIME_8BIT_HEADER=0.3, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4]
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 FciTi42kyLF3 for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 18 Oct 2011 03:47:43 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mailgw10.se.ericsson.net (mailgw10.se.ericsson.net [193.180.251.61]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 57FC121F8C11 for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Tue, 18 Oct 2011 03:47:43 -0700 (PDT)
X-AuditID: c1b4fb3d-b7c26ae0000035b9-b9-4e9d594df05c
Received: from esessmw0237.eemea.ericsson.se (Unknown_Domain [153.88.253.125]) by mailgw10.se.ericsson.net (Symantec Mail Security) with SMTP id 50.DE.13753.D495D9E4; Tue, 18 Oct 2011 12:47:42 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from ESESSCMS0356.eemea.ericsson.se ([169.254.1.250]) by esessmw0237.eemea.ericsson.se ([153.88.115.90]) with mapi; Tue, 18 Oct 2011 12:47:41 +0200
From: Christer Holmberg <christer.holmberg@ericsson.com>
To: =?iso-8859-1?Q?I=F1aki_Baz_Castillo?= <ibc@aliax.net>
Date: Tue, 18 Oct 2011 12:47:40 +0200
Thread-Topic: [rtcweb] SDP Offer/Answer draft-jennings-rtcweb-signaling - Scope
Thread-Index: AcyNgcTRxdBKcWXNQKyR1ulxQCxBnQAAHHyQ
Message-ID: <7F2072F1E0DE894DA4B517B93C6A058522341F41B7@ESESSCMS0356.eemea.ericsson.se>
References: <15B0E3AD-3086-499A-8E79-7AE58B3376C4@cisco.com> <2E239D6FCD033C4BAF15F386A979BF51159957@sonusinmail02.sonusnet.com> <CALiegfnGfpWooceicAbLQ35oVDUZC6+d=903qSKkxW952i-8pw@mail.gmail.com> <7F2072F1E0DE894DA4B517B93C6A058522341F416A@ESESSCMS0356.eemea.ericsson.se> <CALiegfmJ=UKFfEQwfsmYx6TT1sTbEo1BK+hzB2f3V4he5PzSBQ@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CALiegfmJ=UKFfEQwfsmYx6TT1sTbEo1BK+hzB2f3V4he5PzSBQ@mail.gmail.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
acceptlanguage: en-US
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Brightmail-Tracker: AAAAAA==
Cc: Jonathan Rosenberg <jonathan.rosenberg@skype.net>, "rtcweb@ietf.org" <rtcweb@ietf.org>, "public-webrtc@w3.org" <public-webrtc@w3.org>
Subject: Re: [rtcweb] SDP Offer/Answer draft-jennings-rtcweb-signaling - Scope
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: Tue, 18 Oct 2011 10:47:44 -0000

Hi, 

>>>No, this is not a draft about a "default signaling protocol"
>>>for RTCweb. Wrong. This is just a protocol for 
>>>communication between the JavaScript code and the RTCweb stack in the browser. It 
>>>does NOT mandate how the signaling messages are sent on-the-wire.
>>
>> Eventhough the draft does not suggest a default signaling 
>> protocol, I don't think that is completely true that it is 
>> only between the JS app and broswer. At least it's not very clear.
>>
>> - Section 5.1 says: "ROAP messages are typically carried 
>> over a **reliable transport** (likely HTTP via XMLHttpRequest 
>> or WebSockets),..."
> 
> Yes, that is because JavaScript code running in a browser can 
> only communicate via HTTP or WebSocket.

Yes, but the JS app and browser don't communicate with each other using HTTP or WebSockets.


>> - Section 5.3.3 defines an "OK" message, which is used to cease **re-transmissions** of the ANSWER.
> 
> I expect that is a "guideline" for the signaling protocol implementor.
> There is no need for such "OK" message to be received from 
> the peer or server. The own JS code could generate it when 
> appropriate and pass it to its RTCweb stack.

Why? The browser is not going to re-transmit anything, is it?


>> - In addition, there is text talking about **ROAP signaling 
>> messages** (and gateways translating between those and SIP messages).
> 
> That just means that, of course, ROAP must be carried within 
> some signaling protocol (obvious) so, in case of 
> interoperating with a SIP network a gateway is required 
> (unless you use SIP over WebSocket).

Yes, so that means ROAP messages will be carried over some signaling protocol - meaning ROAP is not only a protocol between the JS app and browser.

I just want to make sure everybody has the same understanding of the scope, because at least to me it is a little unclear.

Regards,

Christer