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

Emil Ivov <> Tue, 20 September 2011 12:10 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3714D21F8C39 for <>; Tue, 20 Sep 2011 05:10:20 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -3.249
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.249 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, HELO_EQ_FR=0.35, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1]
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Vmmg9IM1uMWD for <>; Tue, 20 Sep 2011 05:10:19 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4854921F8C2F for <>; Tue, 20 Sep 2011 05:10:19 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by wyg24 with SMTP id 24so524967wyg.31 for <>; Tue, 20 Sep 2011 05:12:23 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by with SMTP id y51mr746286wem.95.1316520743504; Tue, 20 Sep 2011 05:12:23 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( []) by with ESMTPS id ev5sm2015729wbb.11.2011. (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=OTHER); Tue, 20 Sep 2011 05:12:22 -0700 (PDT)
Message-ID: <>
Date: Tue, 20 Sep 2011 14:12:21 +0200
From: Emil Ivov <>
Organization: Jitsi
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; U; Intel Mac OS X 10.7; bg; rv: Gecko/20110902 Thunderbird/3.1.14
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: "Olle E. Johansson" <>
References: <> <> <>
In-Reply-To: <>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Cc: "" <>
Subject: Re: [rtcweb] Call for Consensus on Use Case for Screen/Application/Desktop sharing
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: Real-Time Communication in WEB-browsers working group list <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 20 Sep 2011 12:10:20 -0000

На 19.09.11 09:50, Olle E. Johansson написа:
>>> 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.
>> I see this as a  more tricky thing to get right (in most apps, the
>> mixing of events from multiple sources depends strongly on both
>> proper timing/sequencing and reliable delivery). I would like to
>> not address this for now (RTCWeb version 1).
> I think it's a good use case for the data channel. How many such use
> cases do we have? While use case A is quite often handled as a normal
> video stream, use case B is likely something like VNC. This is an
> application that is part of Microsoft Lync as well as the free SIP
> client Blink today.

I don't see both as having separate implementations. We could very well
have browsers stream the desktop as a regular video flow in one
direction and then add to that (or not) user feedback in the opposite
direction. The feedback could go over signalling (which is what we are
doing in Jitsi), over RTP (something like RFC 4733's DTMF) or over
Pseudo TCP.

Either way I think it's something quite important and I don't think
there's a good reason to leave it for later.

I would be happy to work on that.