Re: [rtcweb] The DTMF API [Was: Traffic should be encrypted. (Re: Let's define the purpose of WebRTC)]

Justin Uberti <juberti@google.com> Wed, 16 November 2011 11:26 UTC

Return-Path: <juberti@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 759EB21F945F for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 16 Nov 2011 03:26:53 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -102.051
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.051 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.741, BAYES_00=-2.599, FM_FORGED_GMAIL=0.622, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1, SARE_HTML_USL_OBFU=1.666, 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 LOr-hQuR+YXq for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 16 Nov 2011 03:26:52 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-iy0-f172.google.com (mail-iy0-f172.google.com [209.85.210.172]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0885E21F944D for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Wed, 16 Nov 2011 03:26:51 -0800 (PST)
Received: by iaeo4 with SMTP id o4so543211iae.31 for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Wed, 16 Nov 2011 03:26:51 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=beta; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc:content-type:x-system-of-record; bh=A7yz16aaIkUJKNJVmG7nWbV/A68Td7yWi4k3+L1w4QE=; b=yWVrXSjF4kHY0+nhygzC6r8zWmawGwvmGfmT7MiceJyFOJDcMq9KRrQSKfTm7jbaB2 c7+DvbKkaPa5CTFft1Pw==
Received: by 10.231.9.10 with SMTP id j10mr7235944ibj.53.1321442810076; Wed, 16 Nov 2011 03:26:50 -0800 (PST)
Received: by 10.231.9.10 with SMTP id j10mr7235927ibj.53.1321442808155; Wed, 16 Nov 2011 03:26:48 -0800 (PST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.231.194.134 with HTTP; Wed, 16 Nov 2011 03:26:27 -0800 (PST)
In-Reply-To: <4EC36A4F.6010407@jesup.org>
References: <CAOJ7v-18cNX8xussOPXSEoFxAARu8WriL8XgxPVUXBrWhz=FFg@mail.gmail.com> <4EC28CF5.6000109@jesup.org> <D666B5A5-BF2E-46B7-B97F-06C3736E8357@acmepacket.com> <CAOJ7v-3v5Zu9ZOuL3Qqu+aEDJ4a3cqH+oJ2yj_ewOpxKe=jA_g@mail.gmail.com> <733D6CE2-2360-4688-8268-3503F7E2460C@acmepacket.com> <4EC36A4F.6010407@jesup.org>
From: Justin Uberti <juberti@google.com>
Date: Wed, 16 Nov 2011 06:26:27 -0500
Message-ID: <CAOJ7v-1z9OA1PL1ihuguVpZ-ToTFuTaFJ7wzMJaE6E7zV1ktQg@mail.gmail.com>
To: Randell Jesup <randell-ietf@jesup.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="00151773e7e22bcecb04b1d861e5"
X-System-Of-Record: true
Cc: rtcweb@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [rtcweb] The DTMF API [Was: Traffic should be encrypted. (Re: Let's define the purpose of WebRTC)]
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, 16 Nov 2011 11:26:53 -0000

On Wed, Nov 16, 2011 at 2:46 AM, Randell Jesup <randell-ietf@jesup.org>wrote:

> On 11/16/2011 1:38 AM, Hadriel Kaplan wrote:
>
>> On Nov 16, 2011, at 1:13 AM, Justin Uberti wrote:
>>
>>  [Local]MediaStreamTrack.**sendDTMF(in DOMString tones, in optional long
>>> duration)
>>>
>>> ex:
>>> sendDTMF("1")  // plays tone 1 for 50 ms
>>> sendDTMF("2", 200)  // plays tone 2 for 200 ms
>>> sendDTMF("123")  // plays tones 1, 2, 3 in succession, each for 50 ms
>>> sendDTMF("456", 200)  // plays tones 4, 5, 6 in succession, each for 200
>>> ms
>>>
>> Sounds good to me, but supporting a multi-digit-string as you did above
>> reminds me that I'll have to check with some experts if this is ok - it
>> reminded me there have been issues with DTMFs being too close to each other
>> in time, but I am not an expert in that and it may not be an issue at all.
>>  (there were issues in PSTN when multiple DTMFs were generated back-to-back
>> from a saved address-book contact-entry type thing, but it may have only
>> been a problem for using in-band DTMF which won't be an issue here)
>>
>
> Typically you need an on-time and an off-time when sending a stream.  I
> think typical minimums are around 70ms on, 40ms off, but that's
> off-the-cuff from old neurons.  I think the minimum is around 45ms on, but
> that will see problems with decoders.
>
> http://nemesis.lonestar.org/**reference/telecom/signaling/**dtmf.html<http://nemesis.lonestar.org/reference/telecom/signaling/dtmf.html>
> indicates 50ms min on, 45ms min off, 100ms min cycle duration. I wouldn't
> want to run too close to those numbers, though.
>
> "It should be mentioned that Radio Shack, one of the worlds largest
> retailers of consumer telephone equipment, requires that all telephone
> devices it sells generate DTMF tones of no less than 70 msec of duration.
> Radio Shack developed this number based on real-life use of their equipment
> on telephone networks throughout North America and the finding that shorter
> tones are more likely to cause dialing troubles."


If I read this right, sounds like this means we enforce a minimum tone
length of 100 ms and a minimum gap of 50 ms.

>
>
> --
> Randell Jesup
> randell-ietf@jesup.org
>
>
> ______________________________**_________________
> rtcweb mailing list
> rtcweb@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/**listinfo/rtcweb<https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rtcweb>
>