IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [rtcweb] Data Channel Negotiation and reopening of decisions

Martin Thomson <martin.thomson@gmail.com> Fri, 15 February 2013 17:14 UTC

Return-Path: <martin.thomson@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 C557C21F8893 for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 15 Feb 2013 09:14:12 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.65
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.65 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.050, BAYES_00=-2.599, NO_RELAYS=-0.001]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id psRnswckbAG6 for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 15 Feb 2013 09:14:12 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-wi0-x229.google.com (wi-in-x0229.1e100.net [IPv6:2a00:1450:400c:c05::229]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2B48921F8887 for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Fri, 15 Feb 2013 09:14:11 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-wi0-f169.google.com with SMTP id l13so1624629wie.2 for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Fri, 15 Feb 2013 09:14:11 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:x-received:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id :subject:from:to:cc:content-type; bh=J3mXLzhfTGsrG/Tqlfy1UDTB2bFruWwzp1QFrzyrbiA=; b=g/NIHYMBPSdbX6GaW7f368ag3wFrybTrxsmU9hlAcxrSBLbdPHn/mI+pnxMFAfD9zi 1eSQV+XyW2T7Hm/kdYjBJgRJ1zAHDxj/kS+oRMWo6hWuzhRhrNsEVWd3RNnp2MfIcenY FcsPfz1j5DFidNIlvRKmZEUlqGpAQYp7SwjD1YWpZGGdt0g2h7eOcJsLd7ZcurBltJw5 WsdNRnWUQtK19GZSOurQfhNHV1GHTogbhUp0X1v62afIiwMTBRTHjrnLITq326eqfyzP wtbvddTo0wf+JSI9yorYZtJ8tRsV9i3XFId+4rKDfUPKGuxzlYV1V81ZIqAQrsgi/RYU hu1g==
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.180.8.130 with SMTP id r2mr5614530wia.28.1360948442719; Fri, 15 Feb 2013 09:14:02 -0800 (PST)
Received: by 10.194.5.135 with HTTP; Fri, 15 Feb 2013 09:14:02 -0800 (PST)
In-Reply-To: <8E2722E7-F82A-48D4-80FB-C76929A2E324@lurchi.franken.de>
References: <CABkgnnWUpMSBLioSD2+p82vGszX9R0Q4WFfME5j-DuK+B7KVJw@mail.gmail.com> <5113CD16.6090806@jesup.org> <CABkgnnW792o76t9dKhidOMJpa21VcbPQZFU1HYnY_yjTPCWhYw@mail.gmail.com> <51166A3C.4000604@jesup.org> <CABkgnnV2m=m+qtM1YR4CPse=gyekvWThon_Nxbf8YMVaNuvq6Q@mail.gmail.com> <511B6C9A.4090904@jesup.org> <CABkgnnUiCKuv_=mgLFf4sRnOb1bY190N7E_+V8gfTbKEUTBnDw@mail.gmail.com> <511CB20C.7020003@jesup.org> <CABkgnnU0idt+ntpKjTCMUCVFO9=_fSjGRPikD6Nk_Uem3L7E8g@mail.gmail.com> <89FAFB5C-9D03-4B76-A306-01F9E4EC4105@lurchi.franken.de> <CABkgnnXFrqTo2QpLhjWt5CmcQc6Kv4=vAgd3DgyndNtL1ewm7g@mail.gmail.com> <8E2722E7-F82A-48D4-80FB-C76929A2E324@lurchi.franken.de>
Date: Fri, 15 Feb 2013 09:14:02 -0800
Message-ID: <CABkgnnWzX2tpbadnB3DjhmB7cm6poCDvmxdAW2Z_stMbovJ3gw@mail.gmail.com>
From: Martin Thomson <martin.thomson@gmail.com>
To: Michael Tuexen <Michael.Tuexen@lurchi.franken.de>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Cc: Randell Jesup <randell-ietf@jesup.org>, "rtcweb@ietf.org" <rtcweb@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [rtcweb] Data Channel Negotiation and reopening of decisions
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: Fri, 15 Feb 2013 17:14:12 -0000

On 14 February 2013 18:59, Michael Tuexen
<Michael.Tuexen@lurchi.franken.de> wrote:
> You register at IANA PPID X for binary and PPID Y (Y != X) for text.
> No signaling required.

Great!  That removes the need for an in-band protocol entirely. (I
missed the IANA bit when I read through the description.)

> I expect each data channel consisting of a pair of streams. Each stream
> is contained in at most one data channel.

Correct. The difference between what you have now and what I am
proposing is simple: you match arbitrary stream X to arbitrary stream
Y in the opposite direction through signaling or control messages.  I
am proposing to match stream X to stream X always.  Thus, if you send
on stream 7, this creates a data channel on the other end that also
sends on stream 7.

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email