Re: [rtcweb] Review request for RTCWeb standard signaling protocol
Harald Alvestrand <harald@alvestrand.no> Tue, 04 October 2011 08:18 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 341D121F8D2B for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 4 Oct 2011 01:18:55 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -108.204
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-108.204 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=2.394, BAYES_00=-2.599, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, 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 ze9ldBodIrxX for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 4 Oct 2011 01:18:54 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from eikenes.alvestrand.no (eikenes.alvestrand.no [158.38.152.233]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 095D421F8CF6 for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Tue, 4 Oct 2011 01:18:54 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by eikenes.alvestrand.no (Postfix) with ESMTP id AD52039E132 for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Tue, 4 Oct 2011 10:21:57 +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 BJU477IisJxA for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Tue, 4 Oct 2011 10:21:56 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from [172.16.41.139] (unknown [74.125.121.33]) by eikenes.alvestrand.no (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 03F9939E048 for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Tue, 4 Oct 2011 10:21:55 +0200 (CEST)
Message-ID: <4E8AC222.4050308@alvestrand.no>
Date: Tue, 04 Oct 2011 10:21:54 +0200
From: Harald Alvestrand <harald@alvestrand.no>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux x86_64; en-US; rv:1.9.2.23) Gecko/20110921 Thunderbird/3.1.15
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: rtcweb@ietf.org
References: <2E239D6FCD033C4BAF15F386A979BF510F1367@sonusinmail02.sonusnet.com>
In-Reply-To: <2E239D6FCD033C4BAF15F386A979BF510F1367@sonusinmail02.sonusnet.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="------------010006050504020305060001"
Subject: Re: [rtcweb] Review request for RTCWeb standard signaling protocol
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, 04 Oct 2011 08:18:55 -0000
Ravindran, the core part of your document seems to me to be this list: The following Signaling protocols will qualify for becoming standard RTCWeb signaling protocol 1. Jingle 2. Websocket with SDP offer/answer 3. SIP 4. SIPLite [I-D.cbran-rtcweb-protocols <http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-partha-rtcweb-signaling-00#ref-I-D.cbran-rtcweb-protocols>] 5. Websocket with custom XML 6. Megaco [RFC5125 <http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc5125>] 7. Websocket with SIP [I-D.ibc-rtcweb-sip-websocket <http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-partha-rtcweb-signaling-00#ref-I-D.ibc-rtcweb-sip-websocket>] 8. HTTP with custom XML 9. ??? TBD: Pros and cons for each of the signaling mechanism has to be added My reading of your document is that you want the RTCWEB working group to pick exactly one of these alternatives, and insist that all conformant implementations of RTCWEB support this protocol. I disagree with: a) that this is needed b) that this is a good idea The reasons why it is not a good idea have been raised multiple times, and spending continued effort on trying to debate which of the alternatives you list above is "the best one" is distracting to our purpose of getting the RTCWEB protocol suite done. I do not support pursuing your suggested direction of work in this working group. Harald On 10/03/2011 04:41 PM, Ravindran Parthasarathi wrote: > Hi all, > > RTCWeb standard signaling protocol (http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-partha-rtcweb-signaling-00) draft list the need for standard signaling protocol between RTCWeb client (browser) and RTCWeb server and the possible signaling protocol for the same. This draft is written based on http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/rtcweb/current/msg01172.html mail thread discussion. Could you please provide your valuable comments. > > Thanks > Partha > > -----Original Message----- > From: internet-drafts@ietf.org [mailto:internet-drafts@ietf.org] > Sent: Monday, October 03, 2011 7:56 PM > To: Ravindran Parthasarathi > Cc: Ravindran Parthasarathi > Subject: New Version Notification for draft-partha-rtcweb-signaling-00.txt > > A new version of I-D, draft-partha-rtcweb-signaling-00.txt has been successfully submitted by Parthasarathi Ravindran and posted to the IETF repository. > > Filename: draft-partha-rtcweb-signaling > Revision: 00 > Title: RTCWeb standard signaling protocol > Creation date: 2011-10-03 > WG ID: Individual Submission > Number of pages: 8 > > Abstract: > The standardization of Real time communication between browsers is to > provide the infrastructure for audio, video, text communication using > standard interface so that interoperable communication can be > established between any compatible browsers. RTCWeb specific > Javascript API will be provided by browsers for developing real-time > web application. It is possible to develop signaling protocol like > Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) or Jingle or websocket extension or > custom-made signaling protocol in Javascript. There are lots of > issues in Javascript based signaling protocol. This document list > the need for standard signaling protocol between RTCWeb client > (browser) and RTCWeb server and possible signaling protocol for the > same. > > > > > The IETF Secretariat > _______________________________________________ > rtcweb mailing list > rtcweb@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rtcweb >
- [rtcweb] Review request for RTCWeb standard signa… Ravindran Parthasarathi
- Re: [rtcweb] Review request for RTCWeb standard s… Iñaki Baz Castillo
- Re: [rtcweb] Review request for RTCWeb standard s… Ravindran Parthasarathi
- Re: [rtcweb] Review request for RTCWeb standard s… Iñaki Baz Castillo
- Re: [rtcweb] Review request for RTCWeb standard s… Saúl Ibarra Corretgé
- Re: [rtcweb] Review request for RTCWeb standard s… Harald Alvestrand
- Re: [rtcweb] Review request for RTCWeb standard s… Bernard Aboba
- Re: [rtcweb] Review request for RTCWeb standard s… Ravindran Parthasarathi
- Re: [rtcweb] Review request for RTCWeb standard s… Iñaki Baz Castillo
- Re: [rtcweb] Review request for RTCWeb standard s… Ravindran Parthasarathi
- Re: [rtcweb] Review request for RTCWeb standard s… Tim Panton
- Re: [rtcweb] Review request for RTCWeb standard s… samuel
- Re: [rtcweb] Review request for RTCWeb standard s… Ravindran Parthasarathi
- Re: [rtcweb] Review request for RTCWeb standard s… Iñaki Baz Castillo
- Re: [rtcweb] Review request for RTCWeb standard s… Ravindran Parthasarathi
- Re: [rtcweb] Review request for RTCWeb standard s… Markus.Isomaki
- Re: [rtcweb] Review request for RTCWeb standard s… Neil Stratford
- Re: [rtcweb] Review request for RTCWeb standard s… Ravindran Parthasarathi
- Re: [rtcweb] Review request for RTCWeb standard s… Neil Stratford
- Re: [rtcweb] Review request for RTCWeb standard s… Iñaki Baz Castillo
- Re: [rtcweb] Review request for RTCWeb standard s… Tim Panton
- Re: [rtcweb] Review request for RTCWeb standard s… Hadriel Kaplan
- Re: [rtcweb] Review request for RTCWeb standard s… Saul Ibarra Corretge
- Re: [rtcweb] Review request for RTCWeb standard s… Neil Stratford
- Re: [rtcweb] Review request for RTCWeb standard s… Saul Ibarra Corretge
- Re: [rtcweb] Review request for RTCWeb standard s… Iñaki Baz Castillo
- Re: [rtcweb] Review request for RTCWeb standard s… Ravindran Parthasarathi
- Re: [rtcweb] Review request for RTCWeb standard s… Ravindran Parthasarathi
- Re: [rtcweb] Review request for RTCWeb standard s… Tim Panton
- Re: [rtcweb] Review request for RTCWeb standard s… Ravindran Parthasarathi
- Re: [rtcweb] Review request for RTCWeb standard s… Roy, Radhika R USA CIV (US)
- Re: [rtcweb] Review request for RTCWeb standard s… Ravindran Parthasarathi
- Re: [rtcweb] Review request for RTCWeb standard s… Iñaki Baz Castillo
- Re: [rtcweb] Review request for RTCWeb standard s… Ravindran Parthasarathi
- Re: [rtcweb] Review request for RTCWeb standard s… Avasarala, Ranjit
- Re: [rtcweb] Review request for RTCWeb standard s… Iñaki Baz Castillo
- Re: [rtcweb] Review request for RTCWeb standard s… Iñaki Baz Castillo
- Re: [rtcweb] Review request for RTCWeb standard s… Iñaki Baz Castillo
- Re: [rtcweb] Review request for RTCWeb standard s… Ravindran Parthasarathi
- Re: [rtcweb] Review request for RTCWeb standard s… Saúl Ibarra Corretgé
- Re: [rtcweb] Review request for RTCWeb standard s… Ravindran Parthasarathi
- Re: [rtcweb] Review request for RTCWeb standard s… Avasarala, Ranjit
- Re: [rtcweb] Review request for RTCWeb standard s… Iñaki Baz Castillo
- Re: [rtcweb] Review request for RTCWeb standard s… Saúl Ibarra Corretgé
- Re: [rtcweb] Review request for RTCWeb standard s… Ravindran Parthasarathi
- Re: [rtcweb] Review request for RTCWeb standard s… Roy, Radhika R USA CIV (US)
- Re: [rtcweb] Review request for RTCWeb standard s… Asveren, Tolga
- Re: [rtcweb] Review request for RTCWeb standard s… Tim Panton
- Re: [rtcweb] Review request for RTCWeb standard s… Roy, Radhika R USA CIV (US)
- Re: [rtcweb] Review request for RTCWeb standard s… Roy, Radhika R USA CIV (US)
- Re: [rtcweb] Review request for RTCWeb standard s… Tim Panton
- Re: [rtcweb] Review request for RTCWeb standard s… Ted Hardie
- Re: [rtcweb] Review request for RTCWeb standard s… Tim Panton
- Re: [rtcweb] Review request for RTCWeb standard s… Ravindran Parthasarathi
- Re: [rtcweb] Review request for RTCWeb standard s… Asveren, Tolga
- Re: [rtcweb] Review request for RTCWeb standard s… Iñaki Baz Castillo
- Re: [rtcweb] Review request for RTCWeb standard s… Asveren, Tolga
- Re: [rtcweb] Review request for RTCWeb standard s… Iñaki Baz Castillo
- Re: [rtcweb] Review request for RTCWeb standard s… Jim McEachern
- Re: [rtcweb] Review request for RTCWeb standard s… Asveren, Tolga
- Re: [rtcweb] Review request for RTCWeb standard s… Ted Hardie
- Re: [rtcweb] Review request for RTCWeb standard s… Asveren, Tolga
- Re: [rtcweb] Review request for RTCWeb standard s… Hadriel Kaplan
- Re: [rtcweb] Review request for RTCWeb standard s… Ted Hardie
- Re: [rtcweb] Review request for RTCWeb standard s… Ravindran Parthasarathi
- [rtcweb] Gateway need and usecase [was RE: Review… Ravindran Parthasarathi
- Re: [rtcweb] Gateway need and usecase [was RE: Re… Hadriel Kaplan
- Re: [rtcweb] Review request for RTCWeb standard s… Randell Jesup
- Re: [rtcweb] Review request for RTCWeb standard s… Randell Jesup
- Re: [rtcweb] Review request for RTCWeb standard s… Neil Stratford
- Re: [rtcweb] Review request for RTCWeb standard s… Tim Panton
- Re: [rtcweb] Review request for RTCWeb standard s… Tim Panton
- Re: [rtcweb] Review request for RTCWeb standard s… Neil Stratford
- [rtcweb] UI for getUserMedia() Randell Jesup
- Re: [rtcweb] Gateway need and usecase [was RE: Re… Ravindran Parthasarathi
- Re: [rtcweb] Gateway need and usecase [was RE: Re… José Luis Millán