IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [rtcweb] Interoperability - what have we learned?

Colin Perkins <csp@csperkins.org> Sun, 22 December 2013 18:41 UTC

Return-Path: <csp@csperkins.org>
X-Original-To: rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B7EB71AE94E for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 22 Dec 2013 10:41:00 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.899
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.899 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001] autolearn=ham
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id T4Wpp1iHVJGy for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 22 Dec 2013 10:40:59 -0800 (PST)
Received: from haggis.mythic-beasts.com (haggis.mythic-beasts.com [IPv6:2a00:1098:0:86:1000:0:2:1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DACC01ADFE4 for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Sun, 22 Dec 2013 10:40:58 -0800 (PST)
Received: from [81.187.2.149] (port=36398 helo=[192.168.0.15]) by haggis.mythic-beasts.com with esmtpsa (TLS1.0:RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:16) (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from <csp@csperkins.org>) id 1VunxO-0002ZD-Np; Sun, 22 Dec 2013 18:40:55 +0000
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="Apple-Mail=_7468D020-D956-4D83-A9FA-BC3C29145C18"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 6.6 \(1510\))
From: Colin Perkins <csp@csperkins.org>
In-Reply-To: <BLU169-W89BB21BD97352E6D90939793C60@phx.gbl>
Date: Sun, 22 Dec 2013 18:40:54 +0000
Message-Id: <ADA2658E-00AD-4086-8DBC-D69116763D6E@csperkins.org>
References: <52AE9129.8090702@bbs.darktech.org>, <CABcZeBPOxqa2YQxOrTp9sVF-tQrpg-Kn=CbazBXOx_9dajhUZA@mail.gmail.com>, <52AE9E0C.9060707@bbs.darktech.org> <20131216170820.GD82971@verdi>, <20131220113631.GA70585@verdi> <52B47196.6060400@bbs.darktech.org>, <D5B39658-5766-4C5B-9090-8E8EDC4BCFA6@apple.com>, <BLU403-EAS179850B162A879E8A7BC47793C70@phx.gbl>, <20131221231651.GX3245@audi.shelbyville.oz>, <BLU405-EAS3161C2664A35035737B2A0093C70@phx.gbl>, <20131222000435.GY3245@audi.shelbyville.oz> <BLU169-W89BB21BD97352E6D90939793C60@phx.gbl>
To: Bernard Aboba <Bernard_Aboba@hotmail.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1510)
X-BlackCat-Spam-Score: -28
X-Mythic-Debug: Threshold = On =
Cc: rtcweb@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [rtcweb] Interoperability - what have we learned?
X-BeenThere: rtcweb@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
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: Sun, 22 Dec 2013 18:41:00 -0000

On 22 Dec 2013, at 17:12, Bernard Aboba <Bernard_Aboba@hotmail.com> wrote:
>> And however many drafts may still be waiting on something for completion, I haven't seen huge floods of people reporting having those problems either.
> 
> [BA] There have been a substantial number of issues filed in TRAC - including against the RTP usage document (which does not adequately cover aspects such as feedback messages and bandwidth estimation), 

As far I was aware, those issues have been addressed. If there's anything still outstanding, can you please explain your concerns? There are open issues with the RTP usage draft, but I don't recall any remaining about feedback messages or bandwidth estimation.

> circuit breakers (which appears to compete with the consent mechanism)

Again, I thought your concerns had been addressed some months ago. What issues remain?

-- 
Colin Perkins
http://csperkins.org/

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email