IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [rtcweb] JSEP and draft-ietf-mmusic-sdp-bundle-negotiation-03

"Cullen Jennings (fluffy)" <fluffy@cisco.com> Fri, 22 February 2013 01:34 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 5DBA221E803D for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 21 Feb 2013 17:34:37 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -110.584
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-110.584 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.015, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-8, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
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 SyOUwb34tE0B for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 21 Feb 2013 17:34:36 -0800 (PST)
Received: from rcdn-iport-9.cisco.com (rcdn-iport-9.cisco.com [173.37.86.80]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B542921E803A for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Thu, 21 Feb 2013 17:34:36 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=@cisco.com; l=686; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1361496876; x=1362706476; h=from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:references: in-reply-to:content-id:content-transfer-encoding: mime-version; bh=gOlKfLc3n8NuyHJ6Pa9mezYU6XYSVR4nEoMJPa3LoH0=; b=ZFmgWqT2+Uqgwf1IXmHIg7zzc5+f+KHztEYfpd0+5SgdctZa1hxJEYZv N2hMXy6bmUoCApO16dx0hyDotq8XOI3x90X/UoNJz717UEZ7jpUHctEwl rrtjtNd4sgijMw/PYQFIP1eEmpvn3PxEwWvXzFpQ8WwAHQoR2GWviql9a Q=;
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: AlgFAAPKJlGtJV2Z/2dsb2JhbABFhgepGZF4gQkWc4IfAQEBAwF5BQsCAQgiJDIlAgQOBQiHeAMJBr85jDeCJAIxB4JfYQOIM4wojSSFFYMHgic
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.84,711,1355097600"; d="scan'208";a="176868012"
Received: from rcdn-core-2.cisco.com ([173.37.93.153]) by rcdn-iport-9.cisco.com with ESMTP; 22 Feb 2013 01:34:36 +0000
Received: from xhc-rcd-x11.cisco.com (xhc-rcd-x11.cisco.com [173.37.183.85]) by rcdn-core-2.cisco.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id r1M1YaKp008096 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=FAIL); Fri, 22 Feb 2013 01:34:36 GMT
Received: from xmb-aln-x02.cisco.com ([169.254.5.155]) by xhc-rcd-x11.cisco.com ([173.37.183.85]) with mapi id 14.02.0318.004; Thu, 21 Feb 2013 19:34:36 -0600
From: "Cullen Jennings (fluffy)" <fluffy@cisco.com>
To: Bernard Aboba <bernard_aboba@hotmail.com>
Thread-Topic: [rtcweb] JSEP and draft-ietf-mmusic-sdp-bundle-negotiation-03
Thread-Index: AQHOEJzFFQZZqZwhZEm+vwg0qc1Myg==
Date: Fri, 22 Feb 2013 01:34:35 +0000
Message-ID: <C5E08FE080ACFD4DAE31E4BDBF944EB1133F810A@xmb-aln-x02.cisco.com>
References: <7594FB04B1934943A5C02806D1A2204B0F555F@ESESSMB209.ericsson.se> <BLU002-W14013516E3AE69595F4D5CC93F40@phx.gbl>
In-Reply-To: <BLU002-W14013516E3AE69595F4D5CC93F40@phx.gbl>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-originating-ip: [10.20.249.164]
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-ID: <CFD914B1543B78408C4C755B67CE1323@cisco.com>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
Cc: "rtcweb@ietf.org" <rtcweb@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [rtcweb] JSEP and draft-ietf-mmusic-sdp-bundle-negotiation-03
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, 22 Feb 2013 01:34:37 -0000

On Feb 18, 2013, at 1:01 PM, Bernard Aboba <bernard_aboba@hotmail.com> wrote:

> What are implications of this "new" approach on the SDP usage in the JSEP API, if any? 

Assuming that the IETF can agree on a way to signal multiplexing (and I really like the current bundle draft), I am assuming that the JSEP draft will either say that browsers SHOULD or MUST implement that and the SDP created by create offer would be compliant with that. Having browsers multiplex the RTP is the whole thing driving this so I would be shocked to see us agree on how to do multiplexing then roughly the same set of people decide they did not really want to use it.

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email