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

Martin Thomson <martin.thomson@gmail.com> Fri, 19 July 2013 17:23 UTC

Return-Path: <martin.thomson@gmail.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 B3AF121E8100 for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 19 Jul 2013 10:23:06 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.288
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.288 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.312, BAYES_00=-2.599, NO_RELAYS=-0.001]
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 5j-d0F5IO4Jz for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 19 Jul 2013 10:23:06 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-we0-x232.google.com (mail-we0-x232.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:400c:c03::232]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id F134321E8050 for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Fri, 19 Jul 2013 10:23:05 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-we0-f178.google.com with SMTP id u53so4300935wes.9 for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Fri, 19 Jul 2013 10:23:05 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type; bh=nqoXoOESqtjxOuXFaEMEMrJSWyScuhoh3XWFddYBxgk=; b=Zo92RmqC5wyY03XBYNcg5K9JyKO+j/zE3KFqUHL2HzaX1du1WZGrcXpYX32JKJVAGV jb+cKHyMWQ5OsUQ4oryUvUUnM2Juu8FZAn5N5xE7OlKj35076gW7HFvds84hGhxhJUYB +vUv6MbzoDzb1fH3nhMAo0jK4yRUyRxV3kHpG+ASWkgqhAo+SpZPuUm6Vw+xt9aap7Z+ HzJyyrEqczLux/7HN/IbpTBLjwwreyaxwSNZ6XXxMJXpUn9cce+9yiySy6A5UmaCVWVE I8VAW81rV7IiqpjAzJsaTURjj9d08nnGVFZaNjwpsBodaADcaPN5H/fhA8pTtBylZK4K mbnw==
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.194.78.110 with SMTP id a14mr12861004wjx.84.1374254585140; Fri, 19 Jul 2013 10:23:05 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.194.60.46 with HTTP; Fri, 19 Jul 2013 10:23:05 -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>
Date: Fri, 19 Jul 2013 10:23:05 -0700
Message-ID: <CABkgnnUe2uzkAzAu7cNXevJYSDUwmvi1OZakBnMNKODmWhF=Eg@mail.gmail.com>
From: Martin Thomson <martin.thomson@gmail.com>
To: Adam Roach <adam@nostrum.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
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 17:23:06 -0000

On 19 July 2013 10:09, Adam Roach <adam@nostrum.com>; wrote:
> 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.

I'm saying nothing of the sort.  We definitely need to define what
multiplexing looks like when it happens, but there's a vast gulf
between that and defining how to negotiate it.  Discussions on RTP
shims or SSRC mux did consume some time, but I believe them to be
done.  For quite a while now.

The negotiation part looks like it's nearing completion, but only
after a fairly significant amount of wrangling and pain.