Re: [rtcweb] Summary of Application Developers' opinions of the current WebRTC API and SDP as a control surface

Peter Thatcher <pthatcher@google.com> Mon, 08 July 2013 14:56 UTC

Return-Path: <pthatcher@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 9999621F9D53 for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 8 Jul 2013 07:56:58 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.954
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.954 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.023, BAYES_00=-2.599, FM_FORGED_GMAIL=0.622, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, 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 sYtUvgbjBNTx for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 8 Jul 2013 07:56:58 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-pd0-x232.google.com (mail-pd0-x232.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400e:c02::232]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6DA1521F9D4B for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Mon, 8 Jul 2013 07:56:53 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-pd0-f178.google.com with SMTP id w11so4182728pde.37 for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Mon, 08 Jul 2013 07:56:53 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc:content-type; bh=mJ07ciWiBLzJ+zvyi87SFzZlLJ47JWnJIRmtDCBPdJ4=; b=aLCO95B+72lGMwN+a0Mfrt7K3AxqesknGd5shLMGvxpF0lC0vb7eL+typnHDdFKL3Y QCHBAbMjFfYyjeCuYUjhWAcs+XSK4AYGPdR1PUiW4WwZOstEtnxsmvBBcfzhy/qXb5aS nc2TYiubaWdly3EnJPtBTO9YM6efuXMqVzyVhcbWr8Qp8BuOf4w3fHd0skHpXkFLQSLC ik59Rk8Nx6EGEr1wa3/zxtl54quOiLhqQdzQRxa899q9sLcaWyLXtefHVhPfY3uG+eaG H2yywEUZVbbRzkyin8lXD4VI+oyhnaLv3atDpoAmBr15LfdAqmictcQD9UXrmF6ypqZ5 qsZQ==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc:content-type:x-gm-message-state; bh=mJ07ciWiBLzJ+zvyi87SFzZlLJ47JWnJIRmtDCBPdJ4=; b=iYwPcb69i0OTVnO3QD0ZNayRC33oNB3Br9gqzok9mT3afm+jQnRsS4F+UXZrujDpNQ 3Ldk7am+OSLea1GOBJvCMm0N6gSboVaybB+HwWp7+EtCjskQtBdy83oJBdLfud2p/hTl jfR97BTG0GcgqjE/cyYIgk6GlACYbG2QF1/1VagKj7NyN5aI0gA3ag2nBcwXjE+UqqG+ aG/i7wFfIzHvj6qHhheourvjBZi4VYAlOogjKXvm2N/kveS9HbE2Y8Zjsq4vgxxPz/lM F5VFGild4sJGbYlh16WQT8vRkZajNyjnPe1V2CB6U1lSU1fYqX6B96uCvMwZ5+ibAlnk RkHQ==
X-Received: by 10.68.28.232 with SMTP id e8mr21960151pbh.94.1373295413133; Mon, 08 Jul 2013 07:56:53 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.66.78.169 with HTTP; Mon, 8 Jul 2013 07:56:13 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <alpine.DEB.2.00.1307081649420.19554@lo.psyced.org>
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> <CALiegfnDD8PAxZMfczV=cZtwx49XDT2+XiRhe5t88cT+xayz5g@mail.gmail.com> <8B58E2AB-09B7-4816-8BC4-B932030E2ED2@iii.ca> <CAJrXDUEZixeAsDc42WY-kZvrpA-p4s1sjET-qzxZ2VH9x7yc5Q@mail.gmail.com> <51DAD083.8000901@stpeter.im> <CAJrXDUFaGM+7j8xyjxJ31ZOwDCbwdgivTw1hNjUXqEB9c7kkWw@mail.gmail.com> <alpine.DEB.2.00.1307081649420.19554@lo.psyced.org>
From: Peter Thatcher <pthatcher@google.com>
Date: Mon, 8 Jul 2013 07:56:13 -0700
Message-ID: <CAJrXDUF4kwC5oK=+96q3gwdK_V1+DcyGe+KHnZByrvO5b6ss7g@mail.gmail.com>
To: Philipp Hancke <fippo@goodadvice.pages.de>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=bcaec520eacd45a49a04e101410c
X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQk4lKZQ0NUQxKomNZPYhVXUFp39gpYrEBIJujJH+80mgaoTq7DKQ+3UgOauX8DWxcBUCIiUcE51OPr81xo7u7F4MlOjM+ToPrcBTxbL9X9MMueGhvTJ47F3yUjrALI11KnFeTadRk5fcRzjXoaRbN7jus7+cBJ8mySLKWQLSZv3kJZnLMPIuw2UhpajzClXCWRd68mO
Cc: "<rtcweb@ietf.org>" <rtcweb@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [rtcweb] 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: Mon, 08 Jul 2013 14:56:58 -0000

I'm fine with "mangle".


On Mon, Jul 8, 2013 at 7:54 AM, Philipp Hancke <fippo@goodadvice.pages.de>wrote:

> On Mon, 8 Jul 2013, Peter Thatcher wrote:
>
>> >     > So compatibility with SIP is important but compatibility with
>> >     Jingle is just impossible.
>> >
>> >     The mapping of SDP to jingle is in the Jingle specs ? I'm not
>> >     express any opinion on this one way or another other but the authors
>> >     of theses specs have always claimed Jingle fully mapped to and from
>> SDP.
>> >
>> >
>> > I think he meant "impossible without SDP munging", which I think is
>> > undeniable.
>>
>> What do you mean by "SDP munging"?
>>
>>
>> I mean that if the JS wants to send Jingle XML over the wire, it has to
>> parse the SDP.  Then, when it receives Jingle XML, it has to serialize SDP.
>>   That parsing and serializing of SDP I call "munging".  We could come up
>> with better words for more specific
>> activities, but that seems to be the word everyone else uses, so it's
>> what I've used.
>>
>
> I think "mangle" is a better term here. People who want to do jingle are
> aware of the fact that this is more difficult than running their own
> proprietary stuff over xml. Or use SoX :-)