Re: [rtcweb] Separating stream manipulation from the SDP loudness (Re: Proposed Plan for Usage of SDP and RTP)

Martin Thomson <martin.thomson@gmail.com> Sun, 10 March 2013 19:39 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 C790E21F85A2 for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 10 Mar 2013 12:39:48 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -4.079
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.079 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.481, BAYES_00=-2.599, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1]
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 8h6wPw4QHhIU for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 10 Mar 2013 12:39:48 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-wg0-f54.google.com (mail-wg0-f54.google.com [74.125.82.54]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0778821F858A for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Sun, 10 Mar 2013 12:39:47 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-wg0-f54.google.com with SMTP id fm10so4392110wgb.9 for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Sun, 10 Mar 2013 12:39:47 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:x-received:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id :subject:from:to:cc:content-type; bh=HjBxmUJafQqZjU7e09YAntDlqzftQwUDpE8ygMNC/As=; b=LTE9ra9MbP6uTteOCaqZxByyXAmxUGBar8by7Pv0Q2ZUGcucEp85FKE33pay2O14ms kX2OTlCRBTfTacTWiauUOD9Wx+e0o0mJp36hg+v3ufhwPa4xZGmdaROXhVJHHpV2c4Wa 8XHX2Tvkgh3eK8NJuhFAmVzWKJe0auL7biEw6vy4e590E46vc2ZiQC72i08S+hVzJQMp DXhQZjQn+KQDPN9dA2e3Tj8KATXHl0zk6Q5RIY4SBcezJ38bG+8lNSqZi5r+0Sjgx/5R FQS9w9QoknhYGxWurXbFZegjyfVPkFqvmIeuA/JrjTnMo+bWgAVMgQBfyl/RZypG9Zp+ /iIw==
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.180.76.84 with SMTP id i20mr8681821wiw.9.1362944387212; Sun, 10 Mar 2013 12:39:47 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.194.5.135 with HTTP; Sun, 10 Mar 2013 12:39:47 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <CA+9kkMCzV-0LdyzuTuyY_X7UHagVknpuTF3zk1WCeZ2SzgL-zQ@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CD5D3F35.B22B%robin@hookflash.com> <B9549E2E-6E68-4F34-A9C0-1F050285A70A@acmepacket.com> <CABkgnnXCio-Dw7dN5yfSjeRf3wG2oWow_M2mU-Y49TedSAPQmg@mail.gmail.com> <CAHBDyN6CFTix3W9qWgC1T0O36t4SajL3hMXaHOdkat-p5TY_xA@mail.gmail.com> <CABcZeBMLdEkFZq5rMOY0texKb4DtFQ-O86JkC17kJihxv6Dj8w@mail.gmail.com> <CAHBDyN6mM-rT315uSbeTQfKuCiVwsEDhi7Q6DEbt8pjiJ_4i6g@mail.gmail.com> <CAHp8n2nz=NZb=UaevUSS7GRSBpvn-v9_=QHz6iddnZzyx5-TSQ@mail.gmail.com> <CAJrXDUETwfY7ZvaXO_1Bq8gs8pOTgALQE8FiimrUX7sfuEpDsw@mail.gmail.com> <CAHp8n2kcEHcz11LOYYMZ3-nv2PYQKu=z6M=dsQ_H5JuR8ND7hQ@mail.gmail.com> <513B5D98.2070601@alvestrand.no> <CAJrXDUEL_5BjWVaP4Fu7sY+P7kj1GVz3q3_z=wUtgyzMUnud2w@mail.gmail.com> <CA+9kkMCzV-0LdyzuTuyY_X7UHagVknpuTF3zk1WCeZ2SzgL-zQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Sun, 10 Mar 2013 15:39:47 -0400
Message-ID: <CABkgnnWaV=L=mhfEDfGBFafYq=4gmTOGZmNAco74C9Bnsd6OAg@mail.gmail.com>
From: Martin Thomson <martin.thomson@gmail.com>
To: Ted Hardie <ted.ietf@gmail.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=f46d0434c0aa0c6afe04d7973889
Cc: "rtcweb@ietf.org" <rtcweb@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [rtcweb] Separating stream manipulation from the SDP loudness (Re: Proposed Plan for Usage of SDP and RTP)
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: Sun, 10 Mar 2013 19:39:48 -0000

On 10 March 2013 14:22, Ted Hardie <ted.ietf@gmail.com> wrote:

> On Sun, Mar 10, 2013 at 12:02 AM, Peter Thatcher <pthatcher@google.com>
> wrote:
> > There's a difference between the resolution that you open the camera at
> and
> > the resolution you send over the network at.  Does the current
> constraints
> > API let you capture at one resolution and send at another?  Also, does it
> > let you change the send resolution on the fly?
> >
> Just to make sure I understand the use case here, is the idea that you
> open the camera at one resolution, potentially using that for a
> recording or local display, then send a different resolution to the
> peer?  I ask because I'm trying to understand how this control would
> map to the connection objects--is there always a mediastream track
> consuming the "native" resolution of the camera?
>

The W3C media capture task force has discussed this at some length.  I
suggest that you both consult their archives.  It's all there.

This specific example has been discussed and incorporated into the models.
Unfortunately, the work to incorporate what we agreed to in Boston
regarding this model is not yet complete.