IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [rtcweb] My Opinion: Why I think a negotiating protocol is a Good Thing

Hadriel Kaplan <HKaplan@acmepacket.com> Wed, 19 October 2011 06:05 UTC

Return-Path: <HKaplan@acmepacket.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 B3CCA11E8097 for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 18 Oct 2011 23:05:25 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.525
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.525 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.074, BAYES_00=-2.599]
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 34BgMC7flCB1 for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 18 Oct 2011 23:05:25 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from etmail.acmepacket.com (etmail.acmepacket.com [216.41.24.6]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1DB8D11E8090 for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Tue, 18 Oct 2011 23:05:25 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from MAIL2.acmepacket.com (10.0.0.22) by etmail.acmepacket.com (216.41.24.6) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 8.2.254.0; Wed, 19 Oct 2011 02:05:22 -0400
Received: from MAIL1.acmepacket.com ([169.254.1.230]) by Mail2.acmepacket.com ([169.254.2.157]) with mapi id 14.01.0270.001; Wed, 19 Oct 2011 02:05:22 -0400
From: Hadriel Kaplan <HKaplan@acmepacket.com>
To: Cullen Jennings <fluffy@cisco.com>
Thread-Topic: [rtcweb] My Opinion: Why I think a negotiating protocol is a Good Thing
Thread-Index: AQHMjiUV6kdbKMH90Eeuh1H9I7A1XA==
Date: Wed, 19 Oct 2011 06:05:21 +0000
Message-ID: <570BDE5E-6EDC-4094-8DC0-094CEC3F12DF@acmepacket.com>
References: <4E9D667A.2040703@alvestrand.no> <9B03E9E2-4376-465E-84F5-EDAC51390408@phonefromhere.com> <B5F4C6D1-3F54-4242-A89C-C2FC66AF8E7D@cisco.com>
In-Reply-To: <B5F4C6D1-3F54-4242-A89C-C2FC66AF8E7D@cisco.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-originating-ip: [216.41.24.34]
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-ID: <507CE665A9BC934EBD28CE360B7CF122@acmepacket.com>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Brightmail-Tracker: AAAAAQAAAWE=
Cc: "rtcweb@ietf.org" <rtcweb@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [rtcweb] My Opinion: Why I think a negotiating protocol is a Good Thing
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: Wed, 19 Oct 2011 06:05:25 -0000

On Oct 18, 2011, at 4:59 PM, Cullen Jennings wrote:

> On Oct 18, 2011, at 5:53 , Tim Panton wrote:
> 
>> We have an API with blobs only because we chose to stick with the ugliness that is SDP.
> 
> One of the most compelling argument to me to stick with SDP is that I have a hard time imagining anyone creating a replacement for it in less than a year or two. 

Well... there are already replacements for it in other protocols, but that's not the issue for me - for me one problem is you're _guaranteeing_ we won't see a replacement for it because you're putting it into the browser itself.  Instead of treating the browser as a media/RTP library with an API, you're treating it as an active application agent with a protocol. 

How many RTP libraries do you know of that use SDP offer/answer protocol as their API?  

-hadriel

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email