Re: [rtcweb] Use of offer / answer semantics

Cullen Jennings <fluffy@cisco.com> Wed, 07 September 2011 00:58 UTC

Return-Path: <fluffy@cisco.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 2E0FE21F8DAF for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 6 Sep 2011 17:58:01 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -103.281
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-103.281 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.682, BAYES_00=-2.599, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
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 b1o4IgdsGtTq for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 6 Sep 2011 17:58:00 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mtv-iport-3.cisco.com (mtv-iport-3.cisco.com [173.36.130.14]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 45CC021F8DA8 for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Tue, 6 Sep 2011 17:57:59 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=fluffy@cisco.com; l=1383; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1315357187; x=1316566787; h=subject:mime-version:from:in-reply-to:date:cc: content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references:to; bh=VaxMqGRr4kO44aJ7vQq7S9ggfPoAf4OtZ2JZz+qNFfY=; b=OEQC43574qsJKvpxKA298OhfDkm8gF47aul2+MXLep6kkAQvT0tX+vuP xUBnJUJaKfiWZbCUaIPVgzvGrvmEk/v5apt9WvW3FX9rtzkMrJHamSvpG oDCcGyXlb7NvW1Zzgd2skwKDJJFHMV8so0VSWlsYeFoEM2y4P1WDpRh9k A=;
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: Av0EAHjBZk6rRDoI/2dsb2JhbABDqAp4gUYBAQEBAxIBJz8QCw44VwY1oG4Bn1SGCmAEh2uLQ4UPjB0
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.68,342,1312156800"; d="scan'208";a="554935"
Received: from mtv-core-3.cisco.com ([171.68.58.8]) by mtv-iport-3.cisco.com with ESMTP; 07 Sep 2011 00:59:46 +0000
Received: from [192.168.4.100] (sjc-fluffy-8914.cisco.com [10.20.249.165]) by mtv-core-3.cisco.com (8.14.3/8.14.3) with ESMTP id p870xkUL027922; Wed, 7 Sep 2011 00:59:46 GMT
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1084)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
From: Cullen Jennings <fluffy@cisco.com>
In-Reply-To: <4E6640FC.8080108@jitsi.org>
Date: Tue, 6 Sep 2011 18:59:45 -0600
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <4B62E0EE-DA11-49A0-AB59-3AB1C6DF2B1C@cisco.com>
References: <DB0C463A-FF5F-4C15-B2B4-E81B7DF92351@cisco.com> <4E6640FC.8080108@jitsi.org>
To: Emil Ivov <emcho@jitsi.org>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1084)
Cc: rtcweb@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [rtcweb] Use of offer / answer semantics
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, 07 Sep 2011 00:58:01 -0000

On Sep 6, 2011, at 9:49 AM, Emil Ivov wrote:

>> 
>> 
>> 1) The media negotiations will be done using the same SDP
>> offer/answer semantics that are used in SIP.
> 
> Does this cover media format negotiation only or does it also cover
> transport negotiation? I believe you once mentioned you were a fan of
> "sending ICE candidates as they become available" and for that to happen
> we'd probably need something more XMPP-like than SIP/SDP-like.

The SDP offer / answer cover both and in fact mix them together in a way that is a bit hard to untangle,  so yes, what I am proposing here is that it would cover both. 

In general, I am a fan of the separating the setup of the ICE transport channels from the negotiation of what goes over them but I think we are just too late at this point to really get into doing that and I don't see much support for it. The hard part of this is how to design a signaling GW that does not require a media GW but can map between this and SIP. Thought we might be able to do this, and I think it would be architecturally cleaner, it's a lot more complicated to done. I don't see the work happening to make something like this happen in a time span where it will be relevant. I think people are just looking for something much closer to existing implementations in Chrome and Firefox.