Re: [rtcweb] Proposal for a JS API for NoPlan (adding multiple sources without encoding them in SDP)

Harald Alvestrand <harald@alvestrand.no> Wed, 19 June 2013 12:33 UTC

Return-Path: <harald@alvestrand.no>
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 A939621F9C1E for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 19 Jun 2013 05:33:27 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -110.532
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-110.532 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.067, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-8, 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 C3w6FWoo+op2 for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 19 Jun 2013 05:33:21 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from eikenes.alvestrand.no (eikenes.alvestrand.no [158.38.152.233]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B2FF721F9C19 for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Wed, 19 Jun 2013 05:33:21 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by eikenes.alvestrand.no (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0F82039E1C4 for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Wed, 19 Jun 2013 14:33:19 +0200 (CEST)
X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at eikenes.alvestrand.no
Received: from eikenes.alvestrand.no ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (eikenes.alvestrand.no [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id oPbYDDHywEN6 for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Wed, 19 Jun 2013 14:33:17 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from hta-dell.lul.corp.google.com (unknown [74.125.57.89]) by eikenes.alvestrand.no (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id B615739E1C2 for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Wed, 19 Jun 2013 14:33:17 +0200 (CEST)
Message-ID: <51C1A50D.2010703@alvestrand.no>
Date: Wed, 19 Jun 2013 14:33:17 +0200
From: Harald Alvestrand <harald@alvestrand.no>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:17.0) Gecko/20130510 Thunderbird/17.0.6
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: rtcweb@ietf.org
References: <CAJrXDUHdoxLTsofiwLBdwBNnCCkCBgjSdbmLaXrNEPODMrsSVA@mail.gmail.com> <CAHp8n2m4VwkpbdGE+q73qqij5RDCB4Vb-Ui1LmGSx1zmv8TX2g@mail.gmail.com> <51BFFB65.2020203@jitsi.org> <CAHp8n2mD55CL5sVcSyvqNz_nzqtrwcfEXy_dU23wXGcV0PhR8A@mail.gmail.com> <51C051AB.6030505@makk.es> <CAHp8n2kHS2KKF4tNiYhq6xMPjfSvqojVMhsmUSoz=yS1ZNBymw@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAHp8n2kHS2KKF4tNiYhq6xMPjfSvqojVMhsmUSoz=yS1ZNBymw@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Subject: Re: [rtcweb] Proposal for a JS API for NoPlan (adding multiple sources without encoding them in SDP)
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, 19 Jun 2013 12:33:27 -0000

On 06/19/2013 04:35 AM, Silvia Pfeiffer wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 18, 2013 at 10:25 PM, Max Jonas Werner <mail@makk.es> wrote:
>> Hej Silvia,
>>
>> On 18.06.2013 08:25, Silvia Pfeiffer wrote:> On Tue, Jun 18, 2013 at
>> 4:17 PM, Emil Ivov <emcho@jitsi.org> wrote:
>>>> On 18.06.13, 03:00, Silvia Pfeiffer wrote:
>>>>> What I would like to see, though, is a bit different from what you've
>>>>> proposed. In particular, the MediaFlowDescription object is the one
>>>>> object that I believe is supposed to enable JS developers to  do "SDP
>>>>> hacking" without having to understand SDP. Unfortunately, the way in
>>>>> which it is currently written, this API doesn't help a JS developer
>>>>> much. There are properties in that object like "ssrc" that mean
>>>>> nothing unless you understand SDP.
>>>> SSRC is really just a flow identifier and it actually comes from RTP, not
>>>> SDP.
>>> OK, could we call it rtpflowId or mediaflowId or peerflowId or
>>> something? And what exactly are the other identifiers?
>>> (You will notice that I am really naive wrt SDP, sorry!)
>> Do you really want to create a second "terminology world"? For people
>> who don't know what SSRC means (because they don't know RTP) it may seem
>> reasonable but to those who already know RTP you'd have to explain
>> "yeah, rtpflowId is actually SSRC." So the term SSRC would have to be
>> included in the spec anyway.
> You can leave mention of SSRC to a comment in the spec next to rtpflowId.
>
>> I'm not sure if having different names for the same thing would lead to
>> less confusion.
> If SSRC is the name it's given in SDP and we want to get away from
> SDP, this would be a first step, wouldn't it?

SSRC is the name it's given in RTP, and we have (so far) had consensus 
on using RTP.