Re: [rtcweb] Low Level Javascript API Proposal avail on the webrtc list

[Neil Stratford <[e-mail]>]

On Wed, Oct 5, 2011 at 10:31 AM, Iñaki Baz Castillo <[e-mail]> wrote:

> 2011/10/5 Matthew Kaufman <[e-mail]>:
> > This stuff is exactly what you'll need to add yet more code to solve if
> you
> > try to bake SDP offer-answer into the browser to turn it 90% of the way
> into
> > a SIP phone.
> >
> > And exactly what you *don't* need browser code to solve if it is done
> > elsewhere (for instance, the server might be handling the entire SIP and
> SDP
> > exchange and resolve forking issues at that end without involving the
> client
> > at all.)
>
> No please. The client CAN be intelligent, and that is how SIP usually
> works (intelligence in endpoints rather than in servers).
>
> You can do that if you want (you can build a custom
> SIP<-->EasySimpleJsonProtocol gateway in server side), but please
> don't mandate it. Let me to deal with SDP's in client side (at
> JavaScript level), please. Others could choose what to do, but don't
> force me to create a ugly application protocol gateway just because
> some people prefer to make web clients as "simple as possible".
>

I don't think that anyone is saying that we want to mandate a simple Json
signalling protocol - just that you have the option of coding it all in
javascript at the client side, or at the server side if you wanted to. The
important thing in my view is not to bake SDP into the JS API with the
browser in such a way that we can only build something that looks like SIP.

By SDP 'client side at JavaScript level' are you proposing that the JS API
accepts SDP directly as a parameter, or that you parse the SDP in JS and set
the ICE connection and codecs up as appropriate? (Which is my preference.)