Re: [rtcweb] Making progress on the signaling discussion (NB: Action items enclosed!)

Roman Shpount <roman@telurix.com> Wed, 12 October 2011 22:49 UTC

Return-Path: <roman@telurix.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 AB3E621F8C49 for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 12 Oct 2011 15:49:10 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.901
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.901 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.075, BAYES_00=-2.599, FM_FORGED_GMAIL=0.622, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1]
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 iPHRpiwp0zxx for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 12 Oct 2011 15:49:10 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-qw0-f44.google.com (mail-qw0-f44.google.com [209.85.216.44]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1EAC121F8B72 for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Wed, 12 Oct 2011 15:49:09 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by qadb12 with SMTP id b12so1329138qad.31 for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Wed, 12 Oct 2011 15:49:07 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.224.210.130 with SMTP id gk2mr1014605qab.23.1318459746993; Wed, 12 Oct 2011 15:49:06 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-gy0-f172.google.com (mail-gy0-f172.google.com [209.85.160.172]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id f8sm4835380qap.15.2011.10.12.15.49.05 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=OTHER); Wed, 12 Oct 2011 15:49:05 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by gyh20 with SMTP id 20so1406066gyh.31 for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Wed, 12 Oct 2011 15:49:04 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.68.17.225 with SMTP id r1mr4093408pbd.64.1318459744568; Wed, 12 Oct 2011 15:49:04 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.68.47.40 with HTTP; Wed, 12 Oct 2011 15:49:04 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <4E9612D3.2040207@jesup.org>
References: <CA+9kkMBi9BzDu=WOq3RG-o5nbfnUTftDg3LRBU3DFh=Kc4W5ZQ@mail.gmail.com> <CALiegfnx=qoS_pqyC45WVEYEFqj-3eP9g_kyhAUaOO6He_UEfw@mail.gmail.com> <CA+9kkMCibnPLrEq1234bUMXpiKBK0+22mqwYOM__CpcO2nOayg@mail.gmail.com> <CALiegfms2bt-WPtMeosFQz3-aSf2L6mfX+i68tw45sSgix561Q@mail.gmail.com> <4E8D6507.8000707@ericsson.com> <CALiegf=VyViX2arp0gr0dK4WN_jv=bjwP0LUAxRf=quTxrYrUQ@mail.gmail.com> <CALiegfn15szv-2yXeWptWjsQC2CwVODg_X90gD4odZkCR0LzvA@mail.gmail.com> <4E955775.10206@alvestrand.no> <CABRok6n6UA_nFfLzQ4K+H0+idspEsymW29OZH0J5q1ewF3PpRw@mail.gmail.com> <4E956526.2090604@alvestrand.no> <380E325E-A7EF-489A-AA24-0270224FC87A@phonefromhere.com> <4E957C55.9020706@alvestrand.no> <13C2526B-E7B1-408C-BD1D-EC5E8C8F6472@phonefromhere.com> <4E95871F.9010605@alvestrand.no> <E21755ED-205F-4D80-BB97-CF32E989EB3F@phonefromhere.com> <4E959D48.3090401@mozilla.com> <9E790044-DE19-46DD-89D8-C4F2973F8D65@phonefromhere.com> <CAD5OKxvORBxJk=5oAeWjUdMgq9pr7eePOnKana4VtwVEHFNGNg@mail.gmail.com> <4E9612D3.2040207@jesup.org>
Date: Wed, 12 Oct 2011 18:49:04 -0400
Message-ID: <CAD5OKxu_dL_K1N-H=Cz2Lcyvv8426SXACp1GvCeOLyFpdiyOHw@mail.gmail.com>
From: Roman Shpount <roman@telurix.com>
To: Randell Jesup <randell-ietf@jesup.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=bcaec520ea85b9c62104af21d492
Cc: rtcweb@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [rtcweb] Making progress on the signaling discussion (NB: Action items enclosed!)
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, 12 Oct 2011 22:49:10 -0000

On Wed, Oct 12, 2011 at 6:21 PM, Randell Jesup <randell-ietf@jesup.org>wrote:

> See my much earlier discussion of Forking support by modifying Harald's
> OFFER/ANSWER messages to include ACCEPT, which also helps solve the
> answer-time clipping issues.
>
> (I'll try to dig it out of the archives and repost a link.)
>

I do remember your proposal, and it does address the situation where
JavaScript would need to update the remote target. I am not sure it covers
the case where multiple streams need to be created based on several answers
to the same offer (flow that corresponds to multiple 200 OK responses to a
single INVITE). I don't think it would be very difficult to implement
disambiguation of multiple remote media sources based on remote IP and allow
JavaScript to manage each stream separately. I would suggest some sort of
CLONE API, taking the remote description and creating a new stream, for this
purpose.
_____________
Roman Shpount