Re: [rtcweb] Remote recording - RTC-Web client acting as SIPREC session recording client

["Ravindran Parthasarathi" <[e-mail]>]

Stefan,

As you expect, I have disagreement for not including this usecase in RTCweb 1.0. My reasoning are as follows:

1) As John pointed out and other folks responded, remote recording has importance in few segments like call centre deployment.

2) RTCweb1.0 solution without considering this usecase may end-up in a non-scalable RTCWeb remote recording solution for ever or break RTCWeb1.0 to meet this architectural need of remote recording. 

3) Based on SIPREC discussion, it is very apparent that short-sighted SIP Endpoint implementation which assumes single session for the end-point are forced to interop with SRS using middle box only . I wish that the same situation does not occur for rtcweb clients.

Thanks
Partha 

>-----Original Message-----
>From: [e-mail] [mailto:[e-mail]] On Behalf
>Of Stefan Håkansson LK
>Sent: Tuesday, August 23, 2011 2:15 PM
>To: [e-mail]
>Subject: Re: [rtcweb] Remote recording - RTC-Web client acting as SIPREC
>session recording client
>
>Hm.
>
>I must admit that my instinctive reaction when reading this is:
>
>1. Say that SRC and SRS functionality is out of scope for rtcweb/webrtc
>version 1.
>2. If someone wants to support this, force media through a middlebox
>(which has all media and can do stuff like inserting beeps, mixing,
>recording, ...).
>
>I'm sure there are other opinions....
>
>Cheers,
>Stefan
>
>On 2011-08-23 09:58, Elwell, John wrote:
>> There has been some discussion recently on remote recording, mixed to
>some extent with discussions on local recording and with mailbox, but I
>would like to focus on remote recording and try to summarize.
>>
>> First, some background on the IETF SIPREC WG. This is specifying
>support for SIP-based session recording, whereby a Session Recording
>Client (SRC) on the path of a call (communication session) can forward
>media and metadata to a session recording server (SRS) or recording
>device. In conventional SIP terms, the SRC can exist at an endpoint of
>the communication session being recorded (i.e., at a SIP UA), or at a
>B2BUA that has access to the media as well as the signalling. Very often
>in a contact centre, there are mandatory requirements for recording some
>or all communication sessions, and often calls are routed through a
>B2BUA that also provides the SRC. So in this case there is no
>responsibility on SIP UAs to support SRC functionality, and no issues of
>additional bandwidth on the device's access. However, it is anticipated
>in SIPREC that in some deployments UA-located SRCs will be used. How a
>UA is organized internally to provide SRC functionality is not
>standardized.
>>
>> So the question for RTC-Web is whether a SIP UA implemented as an RTC-
>Web client can provide SRC functionality, i.e., support remote
>recording. An RTC-Web SIP UA is implemented by a combination of
>functionality running on the web server, functionality running in client
>side script (JS) and functionality embedded in the browser. The amount
>of functionality needed in the browser and needing to be exposed at the
>browser API in support of SRC will depend to some extent on how much
>core functionality goes into the browser, in particular whether the
>browser implements SIP or not. Some of the functions noted to date
>include:
>> - ability to take a copy of streams sent to / received from the remote
>party and send them, in real-time, to a remote recording device (SRS);
>> - possible need to mix the copied streams before sending (e.g., mix
>the sent and received audio streams)
>> - possible need to use a different codec or other parameters when
>sending to the SRS;
>> - possible need to use a different encryption/integrity context when
>sending to the SRS;
>> - possible need to insert tones / announcements into the original
>media path being recorded;
>> - possible need to support SDP enhancements for indicating media that
>are being recorded or preferences for which media are being recorded;
>> - possible need to support SIP enhancements for indicating SRC/SRS
>capability and recording awareness (if SIP is implemented in browser);
>> - possible need to support the sending of metadata to the SRS (if SIP
>is implemented in browser).
>>
>> Clearly there would be a fairly big hurdle for browsers to support SRC
>functionality. But without this, RTC-Web clients would not be suitable
>for use in environments where remote recording is required and calls are
>not forced through some middlebox that provides SRC functionality.
>>
>> John
>>
>> John Elwell
>> Tel: [phone] (office and mobile)
>> Email: [e-mail]
>> http://www.siemens-enterprise.com/uk/
>>
>> Siemens Enterprise Communications Limited.
>> Registered office: Brickhill Street, Willen Lake, Milton Keynes, MK15
>0DJ.
>> Registered No: 5903714, England.
>>
>> Siemens Enterprise Communications Limited is a Trademark Licensee of
>Siemens AG.
>> _______________________________________________
>> rtcweb mailing list
>> [e-mail]
>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rtcweb
>
>_______________________________________________
>rtcweb mailing list
>[e-mail]
>https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rtcweb