Re: [rtcweb] On babies and bathwater (was Re: Summary of Application Developers' opinions of the current WebRTC API and SDP as a control surface)

Peter Thatcher <pthatcher@google.com> Fri, 19 July 2013 17:24 UTC

Return-Path: <pthatcher@google.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 CE7AB11E815E for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 19 Jul 2013 10:24:40 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -0.912
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.912 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.601, BAYES_00=-2.599, FM_FORGED_GMAIL=0.622, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, NO_RELAYS=-0.001, SARE_HTML_USL_OBFU=1.666]
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 EdFy7g58ZKfj for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 19 Jul 2013 10:24:40 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-pa0-x229.google.com (mail-pa0-x229.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400e:c03::229]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 450DA11E8147 for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Fri, 19 Jul 2013 10:24:40 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-pa0-f41.google.com with SMTP id bj3so4696596pad.14 for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Fri, 19 Jul 2013 10:24:39 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc:content-type; bh=YqABa7ml8eLslU8E4mLoxYOPgpNyxilrvwbs2v2t1y4=; b=fFjzmB3k+KkFeRMa9mfTSlxUJ07h+5avySIEXiym08wIIEdgA9kY0jvc4f2Z2U2WHd glTaChsB88tTElJ+SjHI0ivHM20LTMhJJ0FNLnjcJPZWkSO2JlOnrMDE5A2MA7nZ4lRL PQeCvUNlcLTOSF88aCP3HuNifSwMubzuZBQ0SW9yu/HAlFv/7om7RJi++udKCRR+AXMN 3JrGanCuvTcYu8Au6SajQ2CgUt/p68Uztt24pn7JbtaWHECt5yK6cpyIM7CPRG7CFnES 3lCntmviKu31dsvmO5JbkDF6UF9SIZmHmUD8KPVn0vbSzEkNZfPOe3LALyYARXB3vTgf NoSQ==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc:content-type:x-gm-message-state; bh=YqABa7ml8eLslU8E4mLoxYOPgpNyxilrvwbs2v2t1y4=; b=C7lZ8FOpQGbPlcCvb5znFYo+SR4jlwtGBfAoQbqoNM4DPmizFVTBw8X/qVe7nnNMQO hXiZMEkQZdCsXi9iRinvWTuqeitDUuPtgTGZyCMWQEzO2kkmCmaeY4u5FEi3JnVC1eGn CTmP3jsYGkiLXhG2PqWyLuFBIzwnR20le2KD5WB+vyOpLJ3VVqJL+yVrOIR+aEeS5ODd dUjfSG5XDsVAxque508ie1tbUPGSr+zTkIdsOdiFzEG9yl73Leh0De48wpPHx+zj7lpP vIqCbdHcHzBYBXQB7Y2JQTEQX8dRZBbt1dYiGYB2qPm7bftvdfhjO3nBtNe239wbaFwb zRSQ==
X-Received: by 10.66.228.72 with SMTP id sg8mr19329377pac.45.1374254679835; Fri, 19 Jul 2013 10:24:39 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.66.78.195 with HTTP; Fri, 19 Jul 2013 10:23:59 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <51E972CC.1020104@nostrum.com>
References: <CAJrXDUGMohpBdi-ft-o_uE7ewFkw7wRY9x7gYEncjov7qi-Bew@mail.gmail.com> <CABcZeBPa4wBS8pYq=0wesMOfL6TkeC7QGAZ8pWwOcnkhkJqWfA@mail.gmail.com> <CAJrXDUFxo8P8wxh8jX3019yPQOuwQ0eVdsFmRXsbWdWinnc5oA@mail.gmail.com> <CABcZeBOTKpmFC34waqZ4kA-P8t+E6yY9gX1JFCHhsBH0+CF-Qw@mail.gmail.com> <1447FA0C20ED5147A1AA0EF02890A64B1C30BC0F@ESESSMB209.ericsson.se> <CAD5OKxtKLMf_d=8GSMrqfNhDHPe9MFP2ZTKzZHFn9CyMr-gSVQ@mail.gmail.com> <1447FA0C20ED5147A1AA0EF02890A64B1C30C833@ESESSMB209.ericsson.se> <CAD5OKxvGfkgRp6tXwbOu_kVteHiBBqsyR5ixH18FMKjCNGO8VQ@mail.gmail.com> <1447FA0C20ED5147A1AA0EF02890A64B1C30CD1E@ESESSMB209.ericsson.se> <BLU401-EAS386F88B3FE140492B39B59693610@phx.gbl> <AE1A6B5FD507DC4FB3C5166F3A05A484213E41E7@TK5EX14MBXC265.redmond.corp.microsoft.com> <C50FDAD5-492C-4A83-AD6D-464242FB4A05@iii.ca> <CALiegfneUj=kzDjR_E1=S-bqAajaPUE3f_A2g8oGriFyPhamPA@mail.gmail.com> <51E96B5B.2050302@nostrum.com> <CABkgnnXa-eTzRHcLMnHam4c+1D9kkvRwi9=V-9P43+p+pKE_sw@mail.gmail.com> <51E972CC.1020104@nostrum.com>
From: Peter Thatcher <pthatcher@google.com>
Date: Fri, 19 Jul 2013 10:23:59 -0700
Message-ID: <CAJrXDUGPHvFs0N4USvcYgjjC82QEX-+2Ty2v3EeXrsZAm3AF2A@mail.gmail.com>
To: Adam Roach <adam@nostrum.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=047d7b111cff05e44404e1e09a8e
X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQnzYbxRGNba7IKnScnSKQtW/C6n+SeAsgFYyXsnpLt6YW78B8s2PPYzQ+dgPEcdJvzEzVmBxHWS7AGl7WTrJ3+zIFOdaSIdCEfEMSyiALtsMIZWRPjfnOOqgExht+AcspsCEqV+ujLtjQhFU0Zz85qYbWZySAuGJxtycZHDFXbJp91GRPfOjCsS80eyZ21wiogmR79Y
Cc: "<rtcweb@ietf.org>" <rtcweb@ietf.org>, "public-webrtc@w3.org" <public-webrtc@w3.org>
Subject: Re: [rtcweb] On babies and bathwater (was Re: Summary of Application Developers' opinions of the current WebRTC API and SDP as a control surface)
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: Fri, 19 Jul 2013 17:24:40 -0000

On Fri, Jul 19, 2013 at 10:09 AM, Adam Roach <adam@nostrum.com>; wrote:

> On 7/19/13 11:54, Martin Thomson wrote:
>
>> As it turns out, "does not need to be solved" doesn't go to 100%.
>> Some problems are deferred to applications.  Intentionally.  Because
>> a) they are better at that than we are, clearly, and b) they don't
>> necessarily want our crappy solutions.
>>
>> How long have we talked about BUNDLE?  How long do you think that it
>> would take someone with a functioning RTP library to build something
>> that multiplexes and demultiplexes RTP streams?
>>
>
> Are you proposing that Firefox come up with its own multiplexing mechanism
> for RTP; Chrome its own; Opera, yet a third; IE, a fourth; and Safari, a
> fifth?  And then we just kind of pray that five proprietary solutions
> developed in a vacuum miraculously work together? I mean, yeah, if we can
> rely on miracle interop for independently-developed proprietary solutions,
> I guess that works.
>
>
Again, you are conflating signalling and API surface.  We could define a
simple API that leaves the control up the application, and different
applications can signal different multiplexing techniques in different
ways.


> Or are you envisioning a WebRTC API that requires javascript applications
> to supply their own RTP stacks?


SDP != RTP.   It is possible to have an RTP stack without an SDP stack.
 You realize this, right?



>
>
> /a
>
> ______________________________**_________________
> rtcweb mailing list
> rtcweb@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/**listinfo/rtcweb<https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rtcweb>
>