Re: [rtcweb] Just browser-browser and browser-"gateway"? is this an RTCweb assumption?

What about browser to a media server? Does anybody want to do, for
instance, video upload from the browser to a video sharing site?
_____________
Roman Shpount

On Fri, Apr 13, 2012 at 7:33 AM, Iñaki Baz Castillo <ibc@aliax.net> wrote:

> Hi, by reading RTCWeb Minutes IETF 83 [1] it seems that most of the
> folks here assume that WebRTC *media* communication can be done in two
> ways:
>
>  1) browser to browser (perhaps with a TURN server)
>  2) browser to gateway
>
> So... what about browser to SIP phone and browser to XMPP/Jingle
> endpoint (assuming ICE and SDES-SRTP support)?
>
> IMHO assuming that a media gateway is required for any browser to
> non-browser media communication is an artificial limitation. If so,
> why does RTCweb makes use of RTP and SDP? why not creating its own
> "media streaming protocol for RTCweb"?
>
> I hope this subject is clarified and such an assumption relaxed.
> Interoperability (*whithout* media gateways) is a good feature and
> makes RTCweb adoption easier. Not all the people interested in RTCweb
> are gateways vendors.
>
> NOTE: I do *not* mean supporting plain and insecure RTP.
>
> Regards.
>
>
>
> [1] http://www.ietf.org/proceedings/83/minutes/minutes-83-rtcweb.htm
>
> --
> Iñaki Baz Castillo
> <ibc@aliax.net>
> _______________________________________________
> rtcweb mailing list
> rtcweb@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rtcweb
>