Re: [rtcweb] How to multiplex between peers

Dzonatas Sol <dzonatas@gmail.com> Mon, 17 October 2011 23:03 UTC

Return-Path: <dzonatas@gmail.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 476B211E8095 for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 17 Oct 2011 16:03:00 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.979
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.979 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.265, BAYES_00=-2.599, HTML_FONT_FACE_BAD=0.884, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, 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 lT3m7D6NKdYN for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 17 Oct 2011 16:02:59 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-vw0-f44.google.com (mail-vw0-f44.google.com [209.85.212.44]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 491C91F0C43 for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Mon, 17 Oct 2011 16:02:59 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by vws5 with SMTP id 5so3660829vws.31 for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Mon, 17 Oct 2011 16:02:58 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :content-type; bh=AqAkGD0hsLyrwBgXCLcajd1wweHiYxRA931BxXCQZ58=; b=OvX6bucslRCbh5PzcCb7HumIm+cu0Gnrh2PDGabfONfgteXT/37WZup3eEYAaISOhI aFlFY16pddWzzhHicU4j1quqMNN+n4fBglda1d4h9tWVP8lmXdEUan6zSfN7khyws+b0 1iUGqgcFsqXu7DzlgRsXNp0xmMUVZ6/K2+PjY=
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.52.36.237 with SMTP id t13mr22449446vdj.45.1318892577756; Mon, 17 Oct 2011 16:02:57 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.52.107.202 with HTTP; Mon, 17 Oct 2011 16:02:57 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <CAD5OKxubdU10Wwr0_hwBRH+JYBdJhKyfNeJJNivjuGwDnqpRtQ@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CA4CDFF2.1C5A3%henry.sinnreich@gmail.com> <4E27EE6E.30600@alvestrand.no> <CAAPAK-50B74tmrvZ+75aYsiwxfvv41akCXOtnrNOdL6jimazGQ@mail.gmail.com> <CA+9kkMBCORykSxx5v0ZsyKOOLNVweREPajqJjM83DifJv8GE1A@mail.gmail.com> <CAD5OKxubdU10Wwr0_hwBRH+JYBdJhKyfNeJJNivjuGwDnqpRtQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 17 Oct 2011 16:02:57 -0700
Message-ID: <CAAPAK-4j8uw+kcwUt+_vDNvg8CX6iYzhvrM=mHiZ32TXERqoRQ@mail.gmail.com>
From: Dzonatas Sol <dzonatas@gmail.com>
To: rtcweb@ietf.org
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=20cf30780d009817db04af869be3
Subject: Re: [rtcweb] How to multiplex between peers
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 Oct 2011 23:03:00 -0000

Are you David420? The one that followed me all over websites just to make
up, even /., just to tell people I'm a bot?

I take that as a threat worthy of E911. If I have to tell people "I am not a
bot" like demanded on "[B]itcoin" then you publicly harassed me.

Is it normal to call people names and consider merit of standardization? I
know it is standard in in the Hasbara Manual. Did you win your point?

On Mon, Oct 17, 2011 at 3:00 PM, Roman Shpount <roman@telurix.com>; wrote:

> In case you did not notice, Dzonatas Sol is a bot. I would suggest just
> spam filtering it.
> _____________
> Roman Shpount
>
>
>
> On Mon, Oct 17, 2011 at 5:51 PM, Ted Hardie <ted.ietf@gmail.com>; wrote:
>
>> Dzonatas,
>>
>> Your emails to the group have become less and less on point over time.
>> Please send email to the group only when you have substantive comments on
>> the work going on.  If you do not, the chairs may have to consider
>> suspending your right to post.
>>
>> regards,
>>
>> Ted Hardie
>>
>> On Mon, Oct 17, 2011 at 1:58 PM, Dzonatas Sol <dzonatas@gmail.com>; wrote:
>>
>>> I got this Quantum Vibe link from an /. ad: http://shar.es/bqNgs<http://t.co/RprNtB3k>
>>>
>>> I think that be a link-in-a-link, a meta-link, or a canonical multiplexer
>>> in pix#4; it applies to B2B and the server-to-server paradigm is not
>>> obvious.
>>>
>>> ...anymore. ;)
>>>
>>> On Thu, Jul 21, 2011 at 2:16 AM, Harald Alvestrand <harald@alvestrand.no
>>> > wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 07/21/11 02:41, Henry Sinnreich wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> +1
>>>>>
>>>>>  If anything this is an argument for ignoring RTP and RTCP and doing
>>>>>> something entirely new that is actually appropriate for what we're
>>>>>> trying to build, not living with crap just because there's an RFC for
>>>>>> it.
>>>>>>
>>>>> Not to forget disposing of ancient SDP as well.
>>>>> Use standard metadata instead, since it is equally usable for all apps,
>>>>> not
>>>>> only for RTC apps.
>>>>>
>>>> Henry, which standard?
>>>> http://www.xkcd.com/927/ applies to metadata too, I think.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> rtcweb mailing list
>>> rtcweb@ietf.org
>>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rtcweb
>>>
>>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> rtcweb mailing list
>> rtcweb@ietf.org
>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rtcweb
>>
>>
>