Re: [rtcweb] Call for Consensus on Use Case for Screen/Application/Desktop sharing

[Stefan Håkansson LK <[e-mail]>]

I think we should skip both these use cases for the time being.

I think we have more than enough to design and agree on to get real-time 
audio and video (with recording) and p2p data. There are design choices 
to make and agree on all over the place (from user consent to RTP).

Besides I think that the most obvious (WebEx-like if you want) use case 
for A is document sharing and slide presentations - and we all know that 
there are several such services available already. So the pieces to 
build them are already available.

So my 2 cents say: let's push this into phase 2, and focus on getting 
phase 1 out in a timely manner :) Sorry for not being enthusiastic.

On 2011-09-19 09:02, Magnus Westerlund wrote:
> WG,
>
> There where some discussion in the Interim meeting last week about a
> Screen/Application/Desktop sharing support use case. My take away from
> the discussion is that this use cases is likely well enough understood
> to actually start a consensus call now. However, to us WG chairs it was
> clear that the use case in question actually needs to be split into two
> parts.
>
> A) Where the RTCWEB enabled browser can use a local application window,
> the whole desktop or a Screen as a media source that can be encoded and
> transported over the peerConnection for displaying/playback at the peer.
>
> B) Where a remote peer can provide one or more input types such as mouse
> and keyboard to control the local system, not only including the
> browser, but also other operating system resources. This clearly can
> only happen after additional consent, most likely on a per occasion
> consent.
>
> My interpretation is that A only allows for application sharing in
> conferencing contexts, like in the WEBEX session the Interim meeting was
> held with where we shared slides. Where the combination of A and B is
> providing for VNC/Remote desktop.
>
> Thus the question to the WG is the following.
>
> 1) Do you support or object the inclusion of use case A, B or Both in
> our Use case document?
>
> 2) Do you have additional comments for or against either of the use cases?
>
>
> As WG chair
>
> Magnus Westerlund
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> Multimedia Technologies, Ericsson Research EAB/TVM
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> Ericsson AB                | Phone  [phone]
> Färögatan 6                | Mobile [phone]
> SE-164 80 Stockholm, Sweden| mailto: [e-mail]
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> _______________________________________________
> rtcweb mailing list
> [e-mail]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rtcweb