IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [rtcweb] Proposal for a JS API for NoPlan (adding multiple sources without encoding them in SDP)

Iñaki Baz Castillo <ibc@aliax.net> Mon, 17 June 2013 21:56 UTC

Return-Path: <ibc@aliax.net>
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 8A3B321F9DFC for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 17 Jun 2013 14:56:30 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.677
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.677 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, FM_FORGED_GMAIL=0.622, MIME_8BIT_HEADER=0.3, 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 8ncrmSX0Sjsf for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 17 Jun 2013 14:56:25 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-qe0-f45.google.com (mail-qe0-f45.google.com [209.85.128.45]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2A7FF21F9CDA for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Mon, 17 Jun 2013 14:56:25 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-qe0-f45.google.com with SMTP id w7so2014005qeb.4 for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Mon, 17 Jun 2013 14:56:24 -0700 (PDT)
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:content-transfer-encoding:x-gm-message-state; bh=xWCJeMYP44fPUFjdnU24f731IbGMi1xVYU6zUNQhtR8=; b=BX4VzOcxFZwK/TK0J/r0OMv/Ve1jrrArn9X8QKcrNU1q3/+Ffz0+EP1bYfWJOwm8aM pXGNv2RdssKuIfcPjUzkaKHNGgnD+8CcCNUHwDo0almSMchqer94tacdx5adpayZAvWE mebrV3r2xnN3waDuMM9OUiz2HR6e2lygxOZfuH+zF+k3uqWtDcyCQx0WPhpCYbEpEFvK //GdDOQW4OIxdG4O3+KT3UFxX+EsFFpgNsS6c9FktSS5m/gwXc+Ifr/zdai3yxGgeblB nfAHZqiQWMM5FvYxvTSudbiMC0uvq8bP0HRL8IWSC4KB89zbCWR5z3xLDo+uzatjKKdZ Ecfw==
X-Received: by 10.229.147.71 with SMTP id k7mr7318526qcv.129.1371506184509; Mon, 17 Jun 2013 14:56:24 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.49.67.65 with HTTP; Mon, 17 Jun 2013 14:56:04 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <CABkgnnWTvJYG1_HQWz3pZw633rgadeKzx472MTzzFMuq073RgQ@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAJrXDUHdoxLTsofiwLBdwBNnCCkCBgjSdbmLaXrNEPODMrsSVA@mail.gmail.com> <CABkgnnUmRpanfpwryyiCUsOdMLzrd74n-4LXaj_AK3aLe0yQ8Q@mail.gmail.com> <51BF5F00.90705@jitsi.org> <CABkgnnWTvJYG1_HQWz3pZw633rgadeKzx472MTzzFMuq073RgQ@mail.gmail.com>
From: Iñaki Baz Castillo <ibc@aliax.net>
Date: Mon, 17 Jun 2013 23:56:04 +0200
Message-ID: <CALiegfkZcXrNR3CXY--d4ObZMV2z7NEpgdyVHtVtROVtDQsT6A@mail.gmail.com>
To: Martin Thomson <martin.thomson@gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQnqz9q1Pwdw4S4hsEKvEwNgRQ/K2CPfUqGWNk5xa75EoPUk+JRUyE/4dAJc4U+fZ/9DRQHh
Cc: "<rtcweb@ietf.org>" <rtcweb@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [rtcweb] Proposal for a JS API for NoPlan (adding multiple sources without encoding them in SDP)
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, 17 Jun 2013 21:56:30 -0000

2013/6/17 Martin Thomson <martin.thomson@gmail.com>:
> On 17 June 2013 12:09, Emil Ivov <emcho@jitsi.org> wrote:
>> So here's your chance: could you please share your view of how this would
>> look if done properly?
>
> Actually, it would look very similar to this.  For everything.  No SDP
> anywhere.  It's comment 22.
>
> It's in the archives of the webrtc list:
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webrtc/2012Oct/att-0076/realtime-media.html

+1


What is the aim of NoPlan? The draft says "This document does not
question the use of SDP and the Offer/Answer model". Why? It should
question it since it treats SDP as if it was a silly and unmanageable
binary blob. It is like "we must live with SDP because it is
mandatory, but let's try to ignore it as much as possible". If so, why
don't ignore SDP entirely?

However NoPlan is the best we have if, finally, SDP is mandated in WebRTC.

I think it is time to write two lists:

1) Advantages of using SDP in WebRTC.

2) Dissadvantages of using SPD in WebRTC.


--
Iñaki Baz Castillo
<ibc@aliax.net>

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email