Re: [rtcweb] My Opinion: Why I think a negotiating protocol is a Good Thing

Wolfgang Beck <wolfgang.beck01@googlemail.com> Tue, 18 October 2011 17:54 UTC

Return-Path: <wolfgang.beck01@googlemail.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 5710421F8BE9 for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 18 Oct 2011 10:54:21 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.977
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.977 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, FM_FORGED_GMAIL=0.622, 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 yicZEOQEONFk for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 18 Oct 2011 10:54:20 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-qy0-f172.google.com (mail-qy0-f172.google.com [209.85.216.172]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8E4DC21F8BA8 for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Tue, 18 Oct 2011 10:54:20 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by qyk34 with SMTP id 34so2205960qyk.10 for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Tue, 18 Oct 2011 10:54:20 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=googlemail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type; bh=WDyImixOFMtdaOPwq8kig00IcCKGj6EkwNa3MMlDkFo=; b=k0MuV1bnzFrbYusu2NWmXGPSsrqlyAbOa0T093cnmubnK9IzNMK21o74n5hRjVC8VE qtttypBRDRGeAY7najj8/fiUre+Tw7DPfw5nfpft5zW3IEX/Tl+lMTHVE8pnvhog/9mU q647Uy0Ayf64Ja6Ww62PWWjNNJBtIU+bIrk5c=
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.68.73.73 with SMTP id j9mr6444842pbv.67.1318960459125; Tue, 18 Oct 2011 10:54:19 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.68.55.230 with HTTP; Tue, 18 Oct 2011 10:54:18 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <4E9D667A.2040703@alvestrand.no>
References: <4E9D667A.2040703@alvestrand.no>
Date: Tue, 18 Oct 2011 19:54:18 +0200
Message-ID: <CAAJUQMhUh5XiFh8rpg=Xag_F_Vm5tuVE5yRnArxzcd6sXb-=Kw@mail.gmail.com>
From: Wolfgang Beck <wolfgang.beck01@googlemail.com>
To: Harald Alvestrand <harald@alvestrand.no>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Cc: "rtcweb@ietf.org" <rtcweb@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [rtcweb] My Opinion: Why I think a negotiating protocol is a Good Thing
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: Tue, 18 Oct 2011 17:54:21 -0000

On Tue, Oct 18, 2011 at 1:43 PM, Harald Alvestrand <harald@alvestrand.no>; wrote:


> The context of RTCWEB is the well known trapezoid:
>
> +-----------+ +-----------+
> | Web | | Web |
> | | Signalling | |
> | |-------------| |
> | Server | path | Server |
> | | | |
> +-----------+ +-----------+
> / \
> / \ Proprietary over
> / \ HTTP/Websockets
> / \
> / Proprietary over \
> / HTTP/Websockets \
> / \
> +-----------+ +-----------+
> |JS/HTML/CSS| |JS/HTML/CSS|
> +-----------+ +-----------+
> +-----------+ +-----------+
> | | | |
> | | | |
> | Browser | ------------------------- | Browser |
> | | Media path | |
> | | | |
> +-----------+ +-----------+
>
> or even the triangle, where the triangle is formed when the two Web severs
> on top are collapsed into one.
I'll nag you again about my draft where there is only one single web
server and one JS client that runs on both browsers.
If you can make sure that all parties in a call use the same RTCWEB
server and -client, you don't need to standardize a protocol.
We startet RCTWEB to overcome the slow innovation pace associated with
protocol standardization.
If RTCWEB relies on a standardized protocol for its key functionality,
we have gained very little.

> Another design criterion is that interworking should be possible
I'm not convinced that we need this, at least not at the signaling
level of RTCWEB clients and servers.


Wolfgang Beck