IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [rtcweb] No Plan - but what's the proposal

Emil Ivov <emcho@jitsi.org> Mon, 03 June 2013 20:29 UTC

Return-Path: <emil@sip-communicator.org>
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 3873921F90CC for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 3 Jun 2013 13:29:25 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.599
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599]
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 d3iDu05PyoVr for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 3 Jun 2013 13:29:15 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-bk0-x22e.google.com (mail-bk0-x22e.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4008:c01::22e]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2CFC921F909A for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Mon, 3 Jun 2013 13:16:37 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-bk0-f46.google.com with SMTP id na10so2193142bkb.33 for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Mon, 03 Jun 2013 13:16:28 -0700 (PDT)
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=20120113; h=message-id:date:from:organization:user-agent:mime-version:to:cc :subject:references:in-reply-to:content-type :content-transfer-encoding:x-gm-message-state; bh=j3Krwe2ZEdW4Dcp8tUCnJEV7mDUdinON6p3VbkGvtR8=; b=luFE5SAn+ala/HO/qTfLW7jM+gRfjWiOr3q9Y1oSnJyiBxOi323i8ZVXaatYqW+Hd6 yC9BFpdb3R/g+zv3s4D41n8SH4y+IG2K+VwzV8d4NVl5iqEC2Kh2pfGthT0+qAzAXIts ymH/biFlPcI/Wn2oulpTJtN/5jxYt4bkMJO8Br2gvEgYgauJrq/5GKU3nqEUlG3jDEyx 9bTmhICJd4LUqaq189VyWN1UYFYt4mcWK9arp/4qD/j0+5EkezAUTmYquPymwAg1SRhj 7QAJEbbCSgK6soFOONdLvD0fetiWtN/sWFKjM6/knTHfHXB7bqUocO1JBf6HCZAV4fWW EK/A==
X-Received: by 10.204.185.201 with SMTP id cp9mr6940040bkb.128.1370290588030; Mon, 03 Jun 2013 13:16:28 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [10.1.1.28] (damencho.com. [78.90.89.119]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPSA id cm9sm21001836bkb.4.2013.06.03.13.16.25 for <multiple recipients> (version=TLSv1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA bits=128/128); Mon, 03 Jun 2013 13:16:27 -0700 (PDT)
Message-ID: <51ACF998.5030202@jitsi.org>
Date: Mon, 03 Jun 2013 23:16:24 +0300
From: Emil Ivov <emcho@jitsi.org>
Organization: Jitsi
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.8; rv:17.0) Gecko/20130509 Thunderbird/17.0.6
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Cullen Jennings <fluffy@iii.ca>
References: <51A65017.4090502@jitsi.org> <C3639EB3-0F44-4893-88DA-BB9F9C96A116@iii.ca> <51A8EB7F.6000506@jitsi.org> <72B58042-78E3-4759-B3CD-204B82A38447@iii.ca>
In-Reply-To: <72B58042-78E3-4759-B3CD-204B82A38447@iii.ca>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQnPXnTEzEtVwYgOnl/T+wxcRRwoDaKI7Msuz/y1kWtM08kaMUR3NEGkDhcAHry9MxCqq/Ah
Cc: rtcweb@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [rtcweb] No Plan - but what's the proposal
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, 03 Jun 2013 20:29:25 -0000

On 03.06.13, 22:44, Cullen Jennings wrote:
>
> On May 31, 2013, at 12:27 PM, Emil Ivov <emcho@jitsi.org> wrote:
>
>>>
>>> Can you explain what you are actually proposing we do do instead of
>>> just saying what not to do ?
>>
>> We create an offer that would describe the media types and the bundle. We use that offer to also describe capabilities in terms of maximum resolutions, supported header extensions, potentially max-ssrc-s, etc.
>>
>> It is up to the application how to handle the rest. If it needs to transmit additional signalling: let it. If it wants to encode that in SDP, great. If it wants to attach it in JSON next to the browser generated SDP, that also works.
>
> Great - I have super news for you. The WG agree to do that a year or more ago.

So I've heard indeed.

Unfortunately however, it seems that we might have forgotten this 
decision. We are now trying hard to come up with a signalling mechanism 
that will do everything with Offer/Answer.

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email