Re: [rtcweb] RTCWeb default signaling protocol [was RE: About defining a signaling protocol for WebRTC (or not)]

Saúl Ibarra Corretgé <> Fri, 16 September 2011 06:52 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9E73621F8B3F for <>; Thu, 15 Sep 2011 23:52:19 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.633
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.633 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.055, BAYES_00=-2.599, HELO_MISMATCH_NET=0.611, MIME_8BIT_HEADER=0.3]
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id EN55zUVRpZ9F for <>; Thu, 15 Sep 2011 23:52:19 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2AD4121F8B3D for <>; Thu, 15 Sep 2011 23:52:19 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by (Postfix, from userid 5001) id BA75BB01BB; Fri, 16 Sep 2011 08:54:32 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from [] ( []) by (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 1803FB019A; Fri, 16 Sep 2011 08:54:32 +0200 (CEST)
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1084)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
From: =?iso-8859-1?Q?Sa=FAl_Ibarra_Corretg=E9?= <>
In-Reply-To: <>
Date: Fri, 16 Sep 2011 08:54:31 +0200
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <>
References: <> <> <> <> <>
To: Roman Shpount <>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1084)
Subject: Re: [rtcweb] RTCWeb default signaling protocol [was RE: About defining a signaling protocol for WebRTC (or not)]
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: Real-Time Communication in WEB-browsers working group list <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 16 Sep 2011 06:52:19 -0000


On Sep 16, 2011, at 2:52 AM, Roman Shpount wrote:

> Partha,
> It is not possible to implement browser to browser calls unless both browsers are on public IPs or on the same network. As far as signaling is concerned, it is always going to be browser to server to browser call. Since there is always a server on the signaling path and since implementing a signaling gateway from long poll HTTP or websocket signaling interface to SIP (as shown by a number of projects mentioned in this thread) is straight forward enough to implement, there is no desire to create a standard signaling protocol to be used in the browser. There is no benefit for the application developer in following this standard, since it provides neither more functionality no better performance then a custom protocol implemented in JavaScript. Interop and fragmentation arguments do not apply to this either, since it is the same as complaining that HotMail and GMail use different protocols when implementing web mail. It does not affect anything since this stays within the same application and is no more then an implementation detail.

I couldn't have said it better :-)

Saúl Ibarra Corretgé
AG Projects