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

Iñaki Baz Castillo <ibc@aliax.net> Thu, 04 July 2013 08:21 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 6990821F9F55 for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 4 Jul 2013 01:21:33 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.634
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.634 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.043, 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 CrKgAc-idYSg for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 4 Jul 2013 01:21:28 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-qa0-f53.google.com (mail-qa0-f53.google.com [209.85.216.53]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4F36B21F9EF0 for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Thu, 4 Jul 2013 01:21:27 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-qa0-f53.google.com with SMTP id g10so647899qah.12 for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Thu, 04 Jul 2013 01:21:26 -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=kJLj/hRd1XkQ02jTGVXTO0ZjslAtIOyPo6+xDM0xZiE=; b=Eo/2Z0X5YX9iNKc9mpmf4KZ6YEV/iS+Nrr1FT1/HFTwpGuP4sV/QykWAH1NYndPNDf F6F9RDS025hX3JPpsv9gaojDJHUyaVlwR6MNTahZdQj/aQV1GzlFXsCfpZkwcO5llPGn C9tRo7j5RmrQgrqctz9Wr88ZXpMIkJuLx4jNOUEoStvng98C0p8+mR0SBTcJN3DHW4Jt 1CXHpkgBt/+/rbCIE+0zIZYDYFjkMB6QRdMUUJBZC05T3JU8gNGvnUOXGHUaV3ibDde6 6sArI6doQudS0I/dZqJPi2eMejbFv3Il6xPu2UiHuW2a0vnP2Dk6++LRQz/vigxqu6GB bcBA==
X-Received: by 10.229.206.2 with SMTP id fs2mr1035534qcb.68.1372926086607; Thu, 04 Jul 2013 01:21:26 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.49.72.132 with HTTP; Thu, 4 Jul 2013 01:21:06 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <CABcZeBMxF6UbeXbLLVBiTEhR0mAWL-HgDn7Ra=eiuQ1kUsrFCg@mail.gmail.com>
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> <CABcZeBMCGdY=LS0OG22aFdhwU2m_-H4_sHb15SAYBT7e2_4RLQ@mail.gmail.com> <CALiegfk9nqabnnF8tA5Qwg4_XUKB80sMpA59vm_2v3p4k3VOUg@mail.gmail.com> <CABcZeBN-pEN9jK36aN0kkMX9M82tpJr3B6+TQa4ihJgAJW6vKQ@mail.gmail.com> <CABcZeBMxF6UbeXbLLVBiTEhR0mAWL-HgDn7Ra=eiuQ1kUsrFCg@mail.gmail.com>
From: =?UTF-8?Q?I=C3=B1aki_Baz_Castillo?= <ibc@aliax.net>
Date: Thu, 4 Jul 2013 10:21:06 +0200
Message-ID: <CALiegfk4QjOTeG2qQqdENg2QpkYUPbVV7VO9-1bhBv6Pd6tANg@mail.gmail.com>
To: Eric Rescorla <ekr@rtfm.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQk7cGuWM263JrnAZXkGIW7JGDCJVNzqmvQB/VY21d3BfEBKv0T8UoGeEdlV++cFfDTPXKXY
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: Thu, 04 Jul 2013 08:21:33 -0000

2013/7/4 Eric Rescorla <ekr@rtfm.com>;:
> Looking back at your posts from back then, I see you did in fact suggest
> a set of API modifications that would have included an abstract session
> description. That would in fact have made Jingle somewhat (though not
> really that much) easier. So my last sentence here is unfair. My apologies.

Initially I though that SessionDescription was a powerful JS Object
with all the fields and attributes to construct a SDP, so a developer
could extract those media/transport fields and create a SDP via JS. At
the same time, the SessionDescription object would include helper
methods (defined by the WebRTC API) to build a plain SDP (i.e. toSDP)
and some others like XML-SDP (i.e. toXMLSDP).



--
Iñaki Baz Castillo
<ibc@aliax.net>;