Re: [rtcweb] RTCweb signalling overview
"Muthu Arul Mozhi Perumal (mperumal)" <mperumal@cisco.com> Fri, 09 September 2011 13:23 UTC
Return-Path: <mperumal@cisco.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 CE08921F8A7B for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 9 Sep 2011 06:23:35 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -10.373
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-10.373 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.225, BAYES_00=-2.599, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-8]
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 txpECTy6Gqu6 for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 9 Sep 2011 06:23:34 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ams-iport-1.cisco.com (ams-iport-1.cisco.com [144.254.224.140]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6F5C821F8997 for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Fri, 9 Sep 2011 06:23:32 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=mperumal@cisco.com; l=39225; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1315574727; x=1316784327; h=mime-version:subject:date:message-id:in-reply-to: references:from:to; bh=wzZetMKpiyv5ayFcczEphJMVTJr520xUuJRL4D1AFSM=; b=jb7ImY56cBxVmRQTTojMhLWLcEZQd2rppLUKHNPrhsWLwVsdM1HLS0s2 mtN7JwRwYymmBdvQIs2yAz2MuQrVxmd4giRRt54PZjqsHyXVQpiZmL5fY 78anaQPELQDzvplGMmtP6gYnWq4mdx4ZXNj/TwfBYN0RIzWkPaIleaeEJ s=;
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: Ar0AALESak5Io8UT/2dsb2JhbAA3CoJNliqPGHiBUgEBAQEDAQEBDwEJEQM+GwIBCBEEAQELBhABBgEGASUBHwkIAQEEAQoHAQgBEgeHWJkvAZ5Tg0eCR2AEh2uQa4wE
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos; i="4.68,356,1312156800"; d="scan'208,217"; a="114720018"
Received: from bgl-core-4.cisco.com ([72.163.197.19]) by ams-iport-1.cisco.com with ESMTP; 09 Sep 2011 13:25:25 +0000
Received: from xbh-bgl-411.cisco.com (xbh-bgl-411.cisco.com [72.163.129.201]) by bgl-core-4.cisco.com (8.14.3/8.14.3) with ESMTP id p89DPOKr027096; Fri, 9 Sep 2011 13:25:24 GMT
Received: from xmb-bgl-414.cisco.com ([72.163.129.210]) by xbh-bgl-411.cisco.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.4675); Fri, 9 Sep 2011 18:55:24 +0530
X-Mimeole: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5
Content-class: urn:content-classes:message
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----_=_NextPart_001_01CC6EF3.EE25D19E"
Date: Fri, 09 Sep 2011 18:55:19 +0530
Message-ID: <1D062974A4845E4D8A343C653804920206557F48@XMB-BGL-414.cisco.com>
In-Reply-To: <EDC0A1AE77C57744B664A310A0B23AE220BA3C91@FRMRSSXCHMBSC3.dc-m.alcatel-lucent.com>
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
Thread-Topic: [rtcweb] RTCweb signalling overview
Thread-Index: AcxuwbOFVUfX7jiRRHeJtJuTZ9HjpQALqydQAACotHA=
References: <E2827B1C-5706-41D0-8D96-D342C25901D1@edvina.net><4E69BF72.5060908@alvestrand.no> <EDC0A1AE77C57744B664A310A0B23AE220BA3C91@FRMRSSXCHMBSC3.dc-m.alcatel-lucent.com>
From: "Muthu Arul Mozhi Perumal (mperumal)" <mperumal@cisco.com>
To: "DRAGE, Keith (Keith)" <keith.drage@alcatel-lucent.com>, Harald Alvestrand <harald@alvestrand.no>, rtcweb@ietf.org
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 09 Sep 2011 13:25:24.0416 (UTC) FILETIME=[EE7CB400:01CC6EF3]
Subject: Re: [rtcweb] RTCweb signalling overview
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: Fri, 09 Sep 2011 13:23:35 -0000
|Perhaps the easiest way out is to identify that full |blow SIP is a solution for this specific interface, |and RTCWEB identifies to SIPCORE as to whether there |are any additional requirements that SIP cannot meet. Doesn't this federated SIP suffer from the same problems VIPR is trying to solve? Of course, the alternative is to choose SIP trunk providers and go through SBCs and PSTN -:) Muthu From: rtcweb-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:rtcweb-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of DRAGE, Keith (Keith) Sent: Friday, September 09, 2011 6:39 PM To: Harald Alvestrand; rtcweb@ietf.org Subject: Re: [rtcweb] RTCweb signalling overview With respect to question 3 in this set. As I said on the call, the requirements for what needs to be standardised between the two web servers depends on whether web server A needs to know anything about user B, and whether web server B needs to know anything about user A. I believe this goes beyond SDP, because it may need to be information beyond the media contents, e.g. it may need to include information about each user's capabilities and preferences. I actually have two slightly inconsistent views about this interface. Yes it does need to be standardised. I don't like the idea of fragmentation being forced on the market because an appropriate standardised solution has not been identified. No RTCWEB should not standardise it because it is out of scope of RTCWEB. Surely this is also the interface by which support of interworking with legacy systems has to be attained? Perhaps the easiest way out is to identify that full blow SIP is a solution for this specific interface, and RTCWEB identifies to SIPCORE as to whether there are any additional requirements that SIP cannot meet. Regards Keith ________________________________ From: rtcweb-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:rtcweb-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Harald Alvestrand Sent: 09 September 2011 08:26 To: rtcweb@ietf.org Subject: Re: [rtcweb] RTCweb signalling overview On 09/08/11 20:48, Olle E. Johansson wrote: For those of you that did not participate in today's meeting, there was an excellent overview presented by Martin Kaufman. It gives you an overview over the issues with signalling - to sip or not to sip - and other issues. Do read it. Use the file rtcweb-3.pptx <http://www.ietf.org/proceedings/82/slides/rtcweb-3.pptx> in http://www.ietf.org/proceedings/82/slides/ Seconded. I liked the presentation even though I don't agree with the conclusions (I prefer Cullen's set). /O _______________________________________________ rtcweb mailing list rtcweb@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rtcweb
- Re: [rtcweb] RTCweb signalling overview DRAGE, Keith (Keith)
- Re: [rtcweb] RTCweb signalling overview Olle E. Johansson
- Re: [rtcweb] RTCweb signalling overview Muthu Arul Mozhi Perumal (mperumal)
- Re: [rtcweb] RTCweb signalling overview Harald Alvestrand
- [rtcweb] RTCweb signalling overview Olle E. Johansson
- Re: [rtcweb] RTCweb signalling overview Mary Barnes
- Re: [rtcweb] RTCweb signalling overview Hadriel Kaplan