Re: [rtcweb] Proposed text - remote recording use case

Harald Alvestrand <harald@alvestrand.no> Thu, 15 September 2011 15:36 UTC

Return-Path: <harald@alvestrand.no>
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 9645721F8B1B for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 15 Sep 2011 08:36:17 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -108.566
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-108.566 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=2.033, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-8, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
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 cKQHYWuB1gf4 for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 15 Sep 2011 08:36:17 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from eikenes.alvestrand.no (eikenes.alvestrand.no [158.38.152.233]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 01E2F21F8B17 for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Thu, 15 Sep 2011 08:36:17 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by eikenes.alvestrand.no (Postfix) with ESMTP id B2C4739E0CD for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Thu, 15 Sep 2011 17:38:28 +0200 (CEST)
X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at eikenes.alvestrand.no
Received: from eikenes.alvestrand.no ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (eikenes.alvestrand.no [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 84SBKa86Wwzc for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Thu, 15 Sep 2011 17:38:28 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from hta-dell.lul.corp.google.com (62-20-124-50.customer.telia.com [62.20.124.50]) by eikenes.alvestrand.no (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 5A60139E072 for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Thu, 15 Sep 2011 17:38:28 +0200 (CEST)
Message-ID: <4E721BF3.10505@alvestrand.no>
Date: Thu, 15 Sep 2011 17:38:27 +0200
From: Harald Alvestrand <harald@alvestrand.no>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux x86_64; en-US; rv:1.9.2.18) Gecko/20110617 Thunderbird/3.1.11
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: rtcweb@ietf.org
References: <A444A0F8084434499206E78C106220CA0B04921B16@MCHP058A.global-ad.net> <2E239D6FCD033C4BAF15F386A979BF510F09ED@sonusinmail02.sonusnet.com> <8357A942-21EA-4209-82DB-ADFCEB5F32EF@acmepacket.com> <A444A0F8084434499206E78C106220CA0BC0F38C34@MCHP058A.global-ad.net> <2E239D6FCD033C4BAF15F386A979BF510F0B4E@sonusinmail02.sonusnet.com>
In-Reply-To: <2E239D6FCD033C4BAF15F386A979BF510F0B4E@sonusinmail02.sonusnet.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Subject: Re: [rtcweb] Proposed text - remote recording use case
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: Thu, 15 Sep 2011 15:36:17 -0000

On 09/14/11 07:57, Ravindran Parthasarathi wrote:
> John,
>
> I'm fine with Hadriel proposal of "remote peer" instead "remote browser
> or SRS" but not the original wordings.
>
> At this moment, I'm not convinced whether SIPREC SRS will interop with
> RTCWeb browser because the signaling protocol is an open item in RTCWeb.
> The recording could be done by two websocket from browser wherein one
> websocket towards webserver and other towards recorder. How these
> entities interact with each other has to be discussed&  defined. Please
> let me know the reason why this approach may not be followed in RTCWeb.
My opinion:

If this can be built in JS using the APIs and protocols defined by 
RTCWEB/WEBRTC, there is no need for anything more within these groups.

If it cannot be built using these APIs and protocols, we need to 
consider whether these APIs and protocols need to be extended in order 
to cover this use case.

The detailed building of the application is, in my opinion, out of scope 
for RTCWEB.