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

Cullen Jennings <fluffy@iii.ca> Wed, 05 June 2013 00:40 UTC

Return-Path: <fluffy@iii.ca>
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 ABDF221F9A28 for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 4 Jun 2013 17:40:55 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.929
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.929 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.370, BAYES_00=-2.599, MIME_8BIT_HEADER=0.3]
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 Z3LcPwnD7mye for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 4 Jun 2013 17:40:49 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mxout-07.mxes.net (mxout-07.mxes.net [216.86.168.182]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C86DE21F9A16 for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Tue, 4 Jun 2013 17:40:49 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [10.70.232.182] (unknown [64.104.46.217]) (using TLSv1 with cipher AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.mxes.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 1801E22E200; Tue, 4 Jun 2013 20:40:46 -0400 (EDT)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 6.3 \(1503\))
From: Cullen Jennings <fluffy@iii.ca>
In-Reply-To: <CALiegf=pJtdL2A6V7bprZ_F=V39Fadb+kRw3yfO+6+MFVZ9x2A@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 05 Jun 2013 07:40:42 +0700
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <5ED2CC48-1514-4C00-AEE8-A334EB67A6F4@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> <51ACF998.5030202@jitsi.org> <CALiegf=pJtdL2A6V7bprZ_F=V39Fadb+kRw3yfO+6+MFVZ9x2A@mail.gmail.com>
To: Iñaki Baz Castillo <ibc@aliax.net>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1503)
Cc: "rtcweb@ietf.org" <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: Wed, 05 Jun 2013 00:40:55 -0000

On Jun 4, 2013, at 4:07 AM, Iñaki Baz Castillo <ibc@aliax.net> wrote:

> 2013/6/3 Emil Ivov <emcho@jitsi.org>:
>>>> 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.
> 
> 
> I think there is a misunderstanding here. I understand from Emil's
> mail that media re-negotation or streams addition after the first SDP
> O/A is not carried as a new full SDP O/A. Am I right?
> 
> 


I'm just trying to understand what the "No Plan" proposal is. I have not even started to think about what parts of if I like. So far, the more we talk about this, the more confused I get. I think some simple examples that showed what O/A got passed across the API from the JS into the browser for applications with multiple video steams would really help.