Re: [rtcweb] WebRTC service between SPs

Barry Dingle <btdingle@gmail.com> Sat, 29 June 2013 10:27 UTC

Return-Path: <btdingle@gmail.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 D95F321F9EE5 for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 29 Jun 2013 03:27:05 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.599
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, NO_RELAYS=-0.001]
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 0ZVRz1d5RM3R for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 29 Jun 2013 03:27:04 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-we0-x235.google.com (mail-we0-x235.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:400c:c03::235]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5A8E021F9EE3 for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Sat, 29 Jun 2013 03:27:04 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-we0-f181.google.com with SMTP id p58so1895173wes.40 for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Sat, 29 Jun 2013 03:27:03 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc:content-type; bh=UmZD8gI44F+uBLWeo0KZDWrnezmZOPHs+BlyoDXyjCk=; b=kkgq8Cp7f0wosmoZvRvcynvAYc55M1LLRcH0/uonbEBt3F9rFj4Y3i8K99gLxmg8dE 9njRezFcNFOW6X1g4uER5guN4fvHZUG8AsihpWd1JvL4JJG5OIaWFfVA5st/9hkGPdsH QSwECn/dJ7MD7oUMHLXevWBWG06aYirriciuWh+C48WcHFQc+D17WbelbL17gr4QABRg 8N+ykOv4yTxnnDg8O8wtL6Ez/2BNe61XOIEB2G2s5tQtai/VqxT+Tr8X3LSzINhh4qXa +vTxv4K3oKi28bzcIlxsq5tk0kEDrrhqfmeOjX0FcitpS8Bx3Tjjb3wlS05YhxmzCHPZ cJag==
X-Received: by 10.180.20.116 with SMTP id m20mr5778005wie.46.1372501623478; Sat, 29 Jun 2013 03:27:03 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.194.103.135 with HTTP; Sat, 29 Jun 2013 03:26:43 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <034C870DB898BE43B5787C7A79107CD94BFA5254@nkgeml507-mbx.china.huawei.com>
References: <034C870DB898BE43B5787C7A79107CD94BFA4E1B@nkgeml507-mbx.china.huawei.com> <57A15FAF9E58F841B2B1651FFE16D281052E6B@GENSJZMBX01.msg.int.genesyslab.com> <CAA4nhyCLd_JGdGaqGFN3e5qi7eDy4yLVdpSLYU76HCa4AmcUUQ@mail.gmail.com> <CALFWOz4EqVXOTJAUpJ1dU22fpx5J3S5VowFMd=EwkM4sXSSHEA@mail.gmail.com> <034C870DB898BE43B5787C7A79107CD94BFA5254@nkgeml507-mbx.china.huawei.com>
From: Barry Dingle <btdingle@gmail.com>
Date: Sat, 29 Jun 2013 20:26:43 +1000
Message-ID: <CAN=GVAsv+RZP2YQZ6HfbfRGWKROVnn8inW4H-c7K9JG=dSAHSA@mail.gmail.com>
To: "Wangyahui (Yahui)" <yahui.wang@huawei.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=bcaec53f2e31b8a36604e0486f34
Cc: "rtcweb@ietf.org" <rtcweb@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [rtcweb] WebRTC service between SPs
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: Sat, 29 Jun 2013 10:27:06 -0000

I had assumed that a DNS NAPTR record could be used to provide all the
alternate "user id's". Am I right?

Cheers,
/Barry

Barry Dingle
Fixed - +61(0)3-9725-3937    Mob - +61(0)41-911-7578
Fellow of University of Melbourne, Electrical and Electronic Eng.,
Australia
> Linux + Android + Apple + Open Source software


On Sat, Jun 29, 2013 at 7:29 PM, Wangyahui (Yahui) <yahui.wang@huawei.com>wrote;wrote:

>  Thanks for your comments.****
>
> Yes, we can implement the federation between SPs through using the same
> signaling protocol (e.g. SIP) or deploying a gateway.****
>
> ** **
>
> But what I concern is how to compatible with the existing various user id
> from different SPs. For example, if Google provides WebRTC client, then the
> users should be able to login using their Gmail address. In the same way,
> Facebook support the users using FacebookId. So the format of
> identification may be number, string or email and so on.****
>
> ** **
>
> The problem is how to handle addressing users of different SPs. Should it
> be standardized to a unified WebRTC URI?****
>
> ** **
>
> Yahui****
>
> ** **
>
> *发件人:* Hrishikesh Kulkarni [mailto:rishi@turtleyogi.com]
> *发送时间:* 2013年6月29日 14:18
> *收件人:* Moises Silva
> *抄送:* Jim Barnett; Wangyahui (Yahui); rtcweb@ietf.org
> *主题:* Re: [rtcweb] WebRTC service between SPs****
>
> ** **
>
> SIP is an established standard to interoperate domains. We at
> OneKlikStreet.com developed a video/audio bridging service for WebRTC.
> Although it uses JS/JSON signaling for web based clients. Our server could
> very well federate with any other service using SIP. What does need to be
> discussed on app to app basis is what kind of federation you are looking
> for? ****
>
> In case of bridging service we could merge calls from both servers or
> redirect all the calls to the host service.****
>
> ** **
>
> regards,****
>
> Rishi****
>
> Founder, OneKlikStreet.com****
>
> ** **
>
> ** **
>
> ** **
>
> On Fri, Jun 28, 2013 at 11:55 PM, Moises Silva <moises.silva@gmail.com>
> wrote:****
>
> ** **
>
> On Fri, Jun 28, 2013 at 12:03 PM, Jim Barnett <Jim.Barnett@genesyslab.com>
> wrote:****
>
>  As I understand it, it’s not just a problem of identities.  WebRTC does
> not define the signaling protocol, but leaves it  up to the application.
> If two users download their applications/JavaScript from the same site, it
> won’t be a problem, because the same application is handling both ends of
> the call.  But if one user is on site A while the other is on site B, there
> is no guarantee that either site’s application will understand the
> signaling from the other.****
>
> ** **
>
> Unless websites agree to use something standard such as SIP/Jingle for
> federation (inter website/domain communication).
>
> -****
>
> Moy****
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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
>
>