Re: [rtcweb] RTCWeb default signaling protocol [was RE: About defining a signaling protocol for WebRTC (or not)]

[Randell Jesup <[e-mail]>]

On 9/19/2011 10:52 AM, Jim McEachern wrote:

> I lean towards a proposal I made a week or two ago; to allow full 
> access (which allows user-written JS signalling libraries) but provide 
> minimal SIP+O/A as an option within the browser. This could be a JS 
> library, but the primary users of this would be the "little guys" who 
> just want simple setup of media streams, and they're most likely to 
> never update, while browsers are updated frequently.
> Are you suggesting that the "minimal SIP+O/A as an option within the browser" be baked into the browser, or simply provided as a standard JS library that would be made available to those who wanted to use it.  It sounds like you are suggesting the later, but I want to be certain, since it could make a big difference.

I am suggesting that it be baked into the browser, but optional to use.  I am
willing to consider alternatives that provide similar ability to the web author,
such as external "standard" libraries, or intermediate forms like someone
suggested such as the SIP state machine in the browser, but parsing in the JS
(which would also require a "standard" external library, just smaller).


-- 
Randell Jesup
[e-mail]