Re: [rtcweb] Plan A, respun

[Harald Alvestrand <[e-mail]>]

Adam, this is the first time I've been compared to the Iraqi Information 
Minister... another achievement unlocked!

There are just 2 issues with your correction:

1) I don't believe your comment (or the RFCs you cite) reflect currently 
deployed reality.
I've seen the lines of code - they allocate from 32 dynamic types, not 192.
So the solution you propose is going to be incompatible with deployed 
code bases.

2) If the true limit at which one has to change allocation strategy were 
to become 96, not 32, it actually strengthens my "falling off a cliff" 
argument (unless you don't believe in applications with more than 96 
streams): This won't be a problem except in rare cases - ensuring even 
more code will be deployed that works until stressed.

I also have a confession to make: On some days, I respond to mail 
addressed to me without checking that I'm caught up on the mailing list 
that the conversation is copied to.

In this case, I responded to the mail sent directly to me on May 12 (a 
Sunday) without checking that I had also read your posting to the list 
on May 8 (Wednesday on the week before).

I suppose that's enough of a lapse in courtesy to be deserving of some 
censure.

           Harald