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

"Ravindran Parthasarathi" <pravindran@sonusnet.com> Tue, 20 September 2011 11:50 UTC

Return-Path: <pravindran@sonusnet.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 DB11221F8C0C for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 20 Sep 2011 04:50:51 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.359
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.359 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.060, BAYES_00=-2.599, MIME_8BIT_HEADER=0.3]
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 TFPypdrm7d0m for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 20 Sep 2011 04:50:51 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-ma01.sonusnet.com (sonussf2.sonusnet.com [208.45.178.27]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4BD8C21F8BF7 for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Tue, 20 Sep 2011 04:50:51 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from sonusmail07.sonusnet.com (sonusmail07.sonusnet.com [10.128.32.157]) by sonuspps2.sonusnet.com (8.14.3/8.14.3) with ESMTP id p8KBrkks025313; Tue, 20 Sep 2011 07:53:46 -0400
Received: from sonusinmail02.sonusnet.com ([10.70.51.30]) by sonusmail07.sonusnet.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.4675); Tue, 20 Sep 2011 07:52:53 -0400
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5
Content-class: urn:content-classes:message
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64
Date: Tue, 20 Sep 2011 17:22:50 +0530
Message-ID: <2E239D6FCD033C4BAF15F386A979BF510F0E38@sonusinmail02.sonusnet.com>
In-Reply-To: <CALiegfnie9Y=s7qkr3+_+_tKtgRQe8BuuopxBK=8pAh_XUt+Cw@mail.gmail.com>
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
Thread-Topic: [rtcweb] RTCWeb default signaling protocol [was RE: About defining a signaling protocol for WebRTC (or not)]
Thread-Index: Acx3dc/q6XkjXS2uTcqq7kBUq/+VAQAE/+oA
References: <CALiegfnOCxyTo9ffQ272+ncdu5UdgrtDT-dn10BWGTZMEjZoCg@mail.gmail.com><2E239D6FCD033C4BAF15F386A979BF510F0C0A@sonusinmail02.sonusnet.com><05CAC192-E462-421F-B1E5-B78DC8F60306@ag-projects.com><2E239D6FCD033C4BAF15F386A979BF510F0C93@sonusinmail02.sonusnet.com><16880306-5B3A-4EFD-ADE4-1201138D9182@acmepacket.com><8584590C8D7DD141AA96D01920FC6C698C896B71@gbplmail03.genband.com><CA+9kkMAwnnKKO5+q6ey4Z0QNxax1QF21vVtw8FNsHy_rmfenjQ@mail.gmail.com><4E76E078.5020708@jesup.org><8548CBBD-4E12-48F3-BC59-341FF45EF22F@acmepacket.com><4E77495E.4000409@jesup.org><CALiegfkTdCAeEdZbXP1Y9L6i4Anjrgf1CG6ZNj35WGoHL3p_Ew@mail.gmail.com><4E774F92.4040405@jesup.org><8ECCEE59-E855-4EA9-92B9-543D1585B1F0@ag-projects.com><4E778F1F.9090105@jesup.org><CEA0AC9E-6387-4066-95DC-0D70302E80A7@ag-projects.com><4E77C3EC.9060801@jesup.org><CAD5OKxtciYxaVpb7b3G9yMg1A97b9dkjkOpppZcSRzS5SAO3+A@mail.gmail.com><2E239D6FCD033C4BAF15F386A979BF510F0DD8@sonusinmail02.sonusnet.com><CALiegfkCrusXTrJt9ez4CkYNBUR4s8 MDD75Ksj exS0z-c=uPZA @mail.gmail.com><2E239D6FCD033C4BAF15F386A979BF510F0E12@sonusinmail02.sonusnet.com> <CALiegfnie9Y=s7qkr3+_+_tKtgRQe8BuuopxBK=8pAh_XUt+Cw@mail.gmail.com>
From: "Ravindran Parthasarathi" <pravindran@sonusnet.com>
To: =?utf-8?B?ScOxYWtpIEJheiBDYXN0aWxsbw==?= <ibc@aliax.net>
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 20 Sep 2011 11:52:53.0815 (UTC) FILETIME=[D49D7470:01CC778B]
Cc: Randell Jesup <randell-ietf@jesup.org>, rtcweb@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [rtcweb] RTCWeb default signaling protocol [was RE: About defining a signaling protocol for WebRTC (or not)]
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, 20 Sep 2011 11:50:52 -0000

Hi Inaki,

Please read inline.

Thanks
Partha

>-----Original Message-----
>From: Iñaki Baz Castillo [mailto:ibc@aliax.net]
>Sent: Tuesday, September 20, 2011 2:45 PM
>To: Ravindran Parthasarathi
>Cc: Roman Shpount; Randell Jesup; rtcweb@ietf.org
>Subject: Re: [rtcweb] RTCWeb default signaling protocol [was RE: About
>defining a signaling protocol for WebRTC (or not)]
>
>2011/9/20 Ravindran Parthasarathi <pravindran@sonusnet.com>;:
>> I have answered to you in the another thread
>(http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/rtcweb/current/msg01172.html).  I
>understand that there are lot of thread, So you might have confused.
>
>Hi Ravindran. It seems that you avoid replying to the questions in my
>previous mail (3 points you have never answered). Same arguments was
>given in the thread you point above, again without responses. Why?
>
>
<partha> The intention is not to avoid your questions. I have answered the questions which are relevant to "default" vs "nothing". For example, 

"2) If browsers speak pure SIP then the server side MUST also speak SIP. How to accomplish with that in shared web hostings? Must the web admins learn about SIP and installing/configuring a OpenSER/Kamailio/OpenSIPS/SER SIP proxy/registrar? This question has been made several times in some threads. No reply yet (same occurs with other given arguments)." 

It is the question on SIP deployment issue for web admin and it has no relevance to "default" vs "nothing" signaling protocol in RTCWeb client. 

Apart from this, couple of questions are circled in different threads and reply has to be propagated again because of the discontinuity in the thread but there is no conclusion. I'm afraid that it may dilute the discussion. It is the main motivation for me to write the text rather than handling in e-mail thread alias. </partha>

>> SIP or XMPP based protocol will be selected as a default protocol
>based on technical merit of a given RTCWeb signaling problem but it is a
>second stage.
>
>What does it mean "SIP or XMPP based protocol will be selected as a
>default protocol [...]"? Anyone reading your mails would assume that
>such a decision is already taken.

<partha>  I could not imagine how to you assume that default protocol decision is already taken based on the above statement </partha>

 Is it? who took it?
>
>
>Regards.
>
>--
>Iñaki Baz Castillo
><ibc@aliax.net>;