Re: [rtcweb] I-D Action: draft-ietf-rtcweb-data-channel-07.txt

"Lijing (Jessie)" <lijing80@huawei.com> Mon, 17 February 2014 07:45 UTC

Return-Path: <lijing80@huawei.com>
X-Original-To: rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5C2A71A004C for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 16 Feb 2014 23:45:40 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -4.749
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.749 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.548, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham
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 iZ3u3Mta4B8U for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 16 Feb 2014 23:45:39 -0800 (PST)
Received: from lhrrgout.huawei.com (lhrrgout.huawei.com [194.213.3.17]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5BD631A0041 for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Sun, 16 Feb 2014 23:45:38 -0800 (PST)
Received: from 172.18.7.190 (EHLO lhreml204-edg.china.huawei.com) ([172.18.7.190]) by lhrrg02-dlp.huawei.com (MOS 4.3.7-GA FastPath queued) with ESMTP id BBE97354; Mon, 17 Feb 2014 07:45:34 +0000 (GMT)
Received: from LHREML403-HUB.china.huawei.com (10.201.5.217) by lhreml204-edg.china.huawei.com (172.18.7.223) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.3.158.1; Mon, 17 Feb 2014 07:45:25 +0000
Received: from SZXEMA407-HUB.china.huawei.com (10.82.72.39) by lhreml403-hub.china.huawei.com (10.201.5.217) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.3.158.1; Mon, 17 Feb 2014 07:45:29 +0000
Received: from SZXEMA510-MBX.china.huawei.com ([169.254.3.206]) by SZXEMA407-HUB.china.huawei.com ([10.82.72.39]) with mapi id 14.03.0158.001; Mon, 17 Feb 2014 15:45:24 +0800
From: "Lijing (Jessie)" <lijing80@huawei.com>
To: "rtcweb@ietf.org" <rtcweb@ietf.org>, "randell-ietf@jesup.org" <randell-ietf@jesup.org>
Thread-Topic: [rtcweb] I-D Action: draft-ietf-rtcweb-data-channel-07.txt
Thread-Index: AQHPJy/M30Ze8LwI8UO/i8Fhdvp2Hpq5FWhQ
Date: Mon, 17 Feb 2014 07:45:22 +0000
Message-ID: <A3045C90BB645147BC99159AA47ABAC7495EA79B@SZXEMA510-MBX.china.huawei.com>
References: <20140211134715.20073.62978.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com>
In-Reply-To: <20140211134715.20073.62978.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com>
Accept-Language: zh-CN, en-US
Content-Language: zh-CN
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-originating-ip: [10.66.171.171]
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-CFilter-Loop: Reflected
Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/rtcweb/BG_JOZzlgrf1DS5x00Fn6DMy5Jw
Subject: Re: [rtcweb] I-D Action: draft-ietf-rtcweb-data-channel-07.txt
X-BeenThere: rtcweb@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
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: Mon, 17 Feb 2014 07:45:40 -0000

Hi,

One question about the implementation of data channel.

Section 4 says:
   Req. 4:   The application SHOULD be able to provide guidance as to
             the relative priority of each data channel relative to each
             other, and relative to the media streams.  This will
             interact with the congestion control algorithms.

It seems that for now there is no W3C API parameters to set the priority of data channel. I wonder if the priority of the data channel isn't open to the application and is decided by the browser. 
So I want to know how the application be able to provide guidance as to the priority.

Best Regards,

Jessie