Re: [rtcweb] [MMUSIC] Default proto transport in JSEP

Roman Shpount <roman@telurix.com> Tue, 04 December 2018 21:21 UTC

Return-Path: <roman@telurix.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 B8E77130E6E for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 4 Dec 2018 13:21:46 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -3.347
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.347 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIMWL_WL_MED=-1.459, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, T_SPF_PERMERROR=0.01, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=telurix-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id hSK4-6f7T11z for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 4 Dec 2018 13:21:45 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-pf1-x429.google.com (mail-pf1-x429.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::429]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A955A130EE4 for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Tue, 4 Dec 2018 13:21:44 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-pf1-x429.google.com with SMTP id q1so8849526pfi.5 for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Tue, 04 Dec 2018 13:21:44 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=telurix-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=s6WjL3qP1z+ZBHj4CCN+zPtY0njDoHz3rgQDmDQAqz8=; b=MQLjyxEC6OJQjZAe8buDDdg/HW7epOXMSITXh8PhlbfZEan5MKrtugEmiQiFlSi69T oujKO/BCeA+uuDcuPLSTehcM3UzvHoGoGgDHjg2MKA/rVlSmqpjMoOuwGaMsYiB+ltuM GNkPE3w+bFrVOHbr0TOaSaM2a0+Q5rm0h0dp/WV0s2t6Hs1088T6TUFYuEW4l0RMA0cq fbqGzj4EuvMg2qZZUsnZ13xw91QoKrTzwxvYjtyj3q3wHebvBJpp4rVAvRT3bANl770v R3PWBRIhLgFoTZkj9bzZzr0QQvpLzfqJS1PlxQYmwPDNb2yXB11kePKtL0WXAsAEZDJl c8Rg==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=s6WjL3qP1z+ZBHj4CCN+zPtY0njDoHz3rgQDmDQAqz8=; b=P14HXQhlfcF+71FT9NTmL5wTFeAqth0SpKdikq3F3KXyk60Wt8t1huEgyCLh6j+TOv vmfQ1p8DrK/Fw/E08+OD/3cmu15+ExVvl2dMCzAYSHPD+/3sy8dUwWzO51Gsp8YVD19V JLS2pvZNwwH2AqD/ZpvSL99Q0njE7lMbH7aPyw01YH1NHc9npXx5PiYW6lC0dKt+qfWH uNKGRu4cdORzd2ZHZfUHhK8VwkP+/oFMAYCkV+1Z3x1fl66q6sG0tJCay1/7wXkqBgPN 1B/8xf9AMJR7UPKQV37QEhbNM69CPtbG8DJdXAUW4zv+LDWwRiaIQYqD5t1l3pdb2RpN xBDw==
X-Gm-Message-State: AA+aEWYw474MKz/yRTRPjgLRzd7OtH2oyzEBkehoXA2YjF8Ks2NQnBA5 LpS7CB9YXhRzwp6fA17KKP023rPWfug=
X-Google-Smtp-Source: AFSGD/WLVSPXvmB1m8LaUAp6xMrJbWfYmSNtjpCVh8/OeT6a7nsoD4VUJaOcAhr7wSJgF6pSA49ewg==
X-Received: by 2002:a62:b15:: with SMTP id t21mr22524169pfi.136.1543958504065; Tue, 04 Dec 2018 13:21:44 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-pl1-f176.google.com (mail-pl1-f176.google.com. [209.85.214.176]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id g28sm33714715pfd.100.2018.12.04.13.21.42 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Tue, 04 Dec 2018 13:21:43 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-pl1-f176.google.com with SMTP id y1so4109998plp.9; Tue, 04 Dec 2018 13:21:42 -0800 (PST)
X-Received: by 2002:a17:902:2f03:: with SMTP id s3mr21092354plb.277.1543958502575; Tue, 04 Dec 2018 13:21:42 -0800 (PST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <CA+9kkMADnZJBaV0hfLuwGU0bGBEP5tCPZ=8Zd_85Dgzi37ghAQ@mail.gmail.com> <CAD5OKxsNFFmER__H0+5Mzts58yn9cWLMEADhSnLR4nreKD9WAQ@mail.gmail.com> <9B9B741B-622F-4565-899B-700636408F6C@iii.ca> <CAD5OKxv9r08RLvMSM4h11A6sXU9E=u_8Qvy-TBfjNcwkhcqf3w@mail.gmail.com> <54ebb208-e7b3-a0f1-6a5c-4745d3a56447@cisco.com> <CAD5OKxut5Lr+Bmyc20y+vV=+_RESw+h72DYLnt3G1_BjS6sTVA@mail.gmail.com> <1346FE48-5D61-48B7-BF37-3D7BAA930DB0@iii.ca> <CAD5OKxv0N+TF3L3bB9KPm4vqQdPZKE=1zkdw1PaV7CpNJ2kYaQ@mail.gmail.com> <110dc822-b3be-7bc2-dcc5-9e6c8277e0d1@nostrum.com> <CAD5OKxtKOLovNCi0cJiEiHD+M3tCda7ZSecU8EJKxVPuFs7maQ@mail.gmail.com> <AM6PR07MB5621291E0EA9E72A8065380A93AE0@AM6PR07MB5621.eurprd07.prod.outlook.com> <AM6PR07MB562184CD3351856DBC45A71B93AE0@AM6PR07MB5621.eurprd07.prod.outlook.com> <AM6PR07MB5621629CDF15C89D5AE048E893AF0@AM6PR07MB5621.eurprd07.prod.outlook.com>
In-Reply-To: <AM6PR07MB5621629CDF15C89D5AE048E893AF0@AM6PR07MB5621.eurprd07.prod.outlook.com>
From: Roman Shpount <roman@telurix.com>
Date: Tue, 4 Dec 2018 16:21:31 -0500
X-Gmail-Original-Message-ID: <CAD5OKxvr_PvirLVTxe0_eaotdv3YwFRF6BM=t=2B+Dzi_kAziA@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CAD5OKxvr_PvirLVTxe0_eaotdv3YwFRF6BM=t=2B+Dzi_kAziA@mail.gmail.com>
To: Christer Holmberg <christer.holmberg@ericsson.com>
Cc: Adam Roach - SIPCORE Chair <adam@nostrum.com>, RTCWeb IETF <rtcweb@ietf.org>, mmusic WG <mmusic@ietf.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="0000000000001814a4057c38da11"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/rtcweb/9fNv4MtoqFlbCoXSb4PYFg71fn4>
Subject: Re: [rtcweb] [MMUSIC] Default proto transport in JSEP
X-BeenThere: rtcweb@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
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: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/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 Dec 2018 21:21:47 -0000

Hi,

On Tue, Dec 4, 2018 at 2:04 AM Christer Holmberg <
christer.holmberg@ericsson.com> wrote:

> Also, as far as I understand, JSEP only defines an API, not a network
> protocol, so if you want to be standards compliant on the wire the JS app
> would have to modify the SDP before sending it to the network, and I do not
> think we want that.
>
>
I generally agree. JSEP is API specification and a signaling profile which
specifies in more detail offer/answer procedures which are used by JSEP
compliant end points. So far, JSEP was compliant with existing procedures,
but it made some things more strict. In that sense, using UDP based
protocols during ICE restart is totally within JSEP scope. Changing RFC
5245 and other related ICE documents, including ice-sip-sdp, in
non-backwards-compatible manner by changing procedures during subsequent
offer/answer exchanges which do not change ICE settings should not be
within this document scope. Furthermore,  it seems to be totally
unnecessary except for procedural and editorial reasons.

Regards,
_____________
Roman Shpount