Re: [rtcweb] SIP MUST NOT be used in browser?

Tim Panton <tim@phonefromhere.com> Tue, 13 September 2011 10:09 UTC

Return-Path: <tim@phonefromhere.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 A494221F8ABB for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 13 Sep 2011 03:09:47 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.566
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.566 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.033, BAYES_00=-2.599]
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 7LwHIVFdt5d5 for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 13 Sep 2011 03:09:45 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from zimbra.westhawk.co.uk (zimbra.westhawk.co.uk [192.67.4.167]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id F208B21F8A62 for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Tue, 13 Sep 2011 03:09:44 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [192.168.157.49] (unknown [93.89.81.113]) by zimbra.westhawk.co.uk (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9D7BE37A90C; Tue, 13 Sep 2011 11:24:31 +0100 (BST)
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1244.3)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
From: Tim Panton <tim@phonefromhere.com>
In-Reply-To: <2E239D6FCD033C4BAF15F386A979BF510F09EC@sonusinmail02.sonusnet.com>
Date: Tue, 13 Sep 2011 11:11:33 +0100
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <ED2BE905-5C52-4A97-99E2-8B925E59C179@phonefromhere.com>
References: <A444A0F8084434499206E78C106220CA0B00FDB08B@MCHP058A.global-ad.net> <89177AB2-F721-47E4-8471-2180EDA10615@voxeo.com> <A444A0F8084434499206E78C106220CA0B00FDB34D@MCHP058A.global-ad.net> <496EE152-41F2-49AB-A136-05735FE5A9F9@voxeo.com><101C6067BEC68246B0C3F6843BCCC1E31018BF6BE2@MCHP058A.global-ad.net> <4E540FE2.7020605@alcatel-lucent.com> <2E239D6FCD033C4BAF15F386A979BF5106423F@sonusinmail02.sonusnet.com> <4E6595E7.7060503@skype.net> <4E661C83.5000103@alcatel-lucent.com> <4E668FB3.9020601@skype.net> <2E239D6FCD033C4BAF15F386A979BF510F08FE@sonusinmail02.sonusnet.com> <4E67AD3D.9000005@alvestrand.no> <2E239D6FCD033C4BAF15F386A979BF510F090F@sonusinmail02.sonusnet.com> <4E686663.1050900@alvestrand.no> <4E68CB68.3020100@alcatel-lucent.com> <4E68D182.2090003@alvestrand.no> <4E68D742.4010203@alcatel-lucent.com> <4E68D8B5.7010602@alvestrand.no> <4E6915F2.5000007@alcatel-lucent.com><4E691CC6.9050905@stpeter.im> <4E695648.2000001@alcatel-lucent.com> <017201cc6ef8$33f571d0$9be 05570$@c om> <2E239D6FCD033C4BAF15F386A979BF510F09EC@sonusinmail02.sonusnet.com>
To: Ravindran Parthasarathi <pravindran@sonusnet.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1244.3)
Cc: rtcweb@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [rtcweb] SIP MUST NOT be used in browser?
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, 13 Sep 2011 10:09:48 -0000

Minor nit - Phono isn't  a javascript SIP Stack. It is a javascript XMPP stack.
The server-side gateways out to SIP etc.

Tim.
On 11 Sep 2011, at 21:13, Ravindran Parthasarathi wrote:

> Hi Aaron,
> 
> Javascript SIP stacks (Ex: phono.com) exists already and RTCWeb1.0 is
> not a gating factor for those development. My worry is that RTCWeb1.0 is
> standardized and then identify the gap in signaling which is not a good
> protocol design. It is better to discuss with signaling rather than just
> solving media protocol requirement alone. In case any implementation
> deployed, the backward compatibility has to be provided till the end of
> the product and RTCWeb1.0 is a not an exception.
> 
> For the time factor concern, let us work for the quick closer and I have
> no disagreement there. But I have problem in case it is mentioned as the
> issues will not be solved to meet the WG deadline.
> 
> Thanks
> Partha
> 
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: rtcweb-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:rtcweb-bounces@ietf.org] On
> Behalf
>> Of Aaron Clauson
>> Sent: Friday, September 09, 2011 7:26 PM
>> To: rtcweb@ietf.org
>> Subject: Re: [rtcweb] SIP MUST NOT be used in browser?
>> 
>> Another 2 cents from a SIP person.
>> 
>> I think attempting to incorporate SIP (or Jingle et al) into RTCWeb
>> would be
>> a bad idea for the reason that it would significantly slow down and
>> complicate the standard. If SIP is included in RTCWeb then there will
>> need
>> to be a discussion, already emerging here, about which parts of SIP to
>> include and all the other intricacies of SIP; transports, sips vs sip,
>> request routing etc etc.
>> 
>> Writing a javascript SIP stack is a small task compared to getting the
>> RTCWeb media capabilities built into browsers. As soon as the first
>> browser
>> appears that supports RTP then javascript SIP stacks will start popping
>> up
>> all over the place.
>> 
>> I for one would love to be able to process calls in my browser and to
> be
>> able to do it yesterday. Slowing the RTCWeb process down for something
>> that
>> will take care of itself anyway, namely readily available javascript
>> signalling libraries, would be a shame.
>> 
>> Aaron
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> rtcweb mailing list
>> rtcweb@ietf.org
>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rtcweb
> _______________________________________________
> rtcweb mailing list
> rtcweb@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rtcweb