Re: [rtcweb] Support for websockets

Salvatore Loreto <salvatore.loreto@ericsson.com> Thu, 08 September 2011 05:24 UTC

Return-Path: <salvatore.loreto@ericsson.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 A623D21F8B7F for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 7 Sep 2011 22:24:33 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -106.58
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-106.58 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.019, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4, 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 85pyxGGNyUMV for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 7 Sep 2011 22:24:33 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mailgw10.se.ericsson.net (mailgw10.se.ericsson.net [193.180.251.61]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9C28D21F8B7D for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Wed, 7 Sep 2011 22:24:32 -0700 (PDT)
X-AuditID: c1b4fb3d-b7c47ae000000b17-93-4e6851fe4e52
Received: from esessmw0247.eemea.ericsson.se (Unknown_Domain [153.88.253.125]) by mailgw10.se.ericsson.net (Symantec Mail Security) with SMTP id 44.38.02839.EF1586E4; Thu, 8 Sep 2011 07:26:22 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from mail.lmf.ericsson.se (153.88.115.8) by esessmw0247.eemea.ericsson.se (153.88.115.94) with Microsoft SMTP Server id 8.3.137.0; Thu, 8 Sep 2011 07:26:22 +0200
Received: from nomadiclab.lmf.ericsson.se (nomadiclab.lmf.ericsson.se [131.160.33.3]) by mail.lmf.ericsson.se (Postfix) with ESMTP id C474324D8 for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Thu, 8 Sep 2011 08:26:21 +0300 (EEST)
Received: from nomadiclab.lmf.ericsson.se (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by nomadiclab.lmf.ericsson.se (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7DB155120C for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Thu, 8 Sep 2011 08:26:21 +0300 (EEST)
Received: from Salvatore-Loretos-MacBook-Pro.local (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by nomadiclab.lmf.ericsson.se (Postfix) with ESMTP id 32F434E64F for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Thu, 8 Sep 2011 08:26:21 +0300 (EEST)
Message-ID: <4E6851FC.6030201@ericsson.com>
Date: Thu, 8 Sep 2011 08:26:20 +0300
From: Salvatore Loreto <salvatore.loreto@ericsson.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; U; Intel Mac OS X 10.6; en-US; rv:1.9.2.21) Gecko/20110830 Thunderbird/3.1.13
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: rtcweb@ietf.org
References: <4E259484.20509@ericsson.com>, <37897D97-85A9-4B21-85C3-A7E9BE1EF3E7@cisco.com>, <4E26B742.6050606@jitsi.org>, <62C71813-83B4-44D3-8E54-28262311CDB3@cisco.com> <BLU152-W38359A17A67825B59CD5D0934C0@phx.gbl> <4E27BE02.7090606@ericsson.com> <9F9278CB1892FB48BF35CB5CC3992478A5395C720E@HKGMBOXPRD01.polycom.com> <4E2EB82C.30709@alvestrand.no> <4E643E39.8020205@skype.net> <4E665588.5000700@mozilla.com> <F2636DC8-94B1-4C17-8A82-B4ED745C913E@cisco.com>
In-Reply-To: <F2636DC8-94B1-4C17-8A82-B4ED745C913E@cisco.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Virus-Scanned: ClamAV using ClamSMTP
X-Brightmail-Tracker: AAAAAA==
Subject: Re: [rtcweb] Support for websockets
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: Thu, 08 Sep 2011 05:24:33 -0000

On 9/7/11 6:04 PM, Cullen Jennings wrote:
> Sooner or later, I do think we should talk about how to spoof RTP through firewalls that only allow HTTP traffic. Certainly websockets would be worth looking at but I suspect we will find that it was not designed for transfer of large high bandwidth material (like video)
surprisingly enough it can transfer large high bandwidth files

/Sal



> and that something similar but different is needed.

>
> On Sep 6, 2011, at 11:16 AM, Christopher Blizzard wrote:
>
>> On 9/4/2011 8:12 PM, Matthew Kaufman wrote:
>>>
>>> I think there's a legitimate question as to how transmission of media over TCP should work. I believe that the existing code bases all assume that if you get IP addresses, you use them; if you get IP addresses for TURN servers you talk to them over UDP and use TURN for relaying; and if you get IP addresses for TURNS servers you talk to them over TLS/TCP and use them for relaying. Therefore the only TCP transport is TURN-over-TLS-over-TCP.
>>>
>>> Is that sufficient and reasonable, or should media-over-websockets (or something else) be how TCP transmission of media works?
>> It's important to note that WebSockets aren't raw sockets in the classic TCP or POSIX sense.  So a conversation about transmission of media over TCP doesn't really apply to WebSockets, exactly.  It's true that since WS is over TCP that it's reliable and ordered.  What would be interesting would be a discussion of how to take media data coming in over a WebSocket and feed it to a consumer that could display that media, as well as the reverse.  But an API discussion feels like something that's more that's something that belongs at the W3C.
>>
>> If we wanted a standardized representation in WS that might happen here, but it's not something that's strictly required.  Well-built APIs to encoders and decoders could mean that it's up to page implementers to figure out how to package the data, manipulated by     JS.
>>
>> --Chris
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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
>