Re: [rtcweb] Call for Consensus on Use Case for Screen/Application/Desktop sharing

Emil Ivov <emcho@jitsi.org> Tue, 20 September 2011 12:09 UTC

Return-Path: <emil@sip-communicator.org>
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 629AE21F8C4C for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 20 Sep 2011 05:09:13 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -3.249
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.249 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, HELO_EQ_FR=0.35, 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 JL3SEiCaqUTB for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 20 Sep 2011 05:09:12 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-wy0-f172.google.com (mail-wy0-f172.google.com [74.125.82.172]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1B3A421F8C1E for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Tue, 20 Sep 2011 05:09:11 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by wyg24 with SMTP id 24so524179wyg.31 for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Tue, 20 Sep 2011 05:11:37 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.216.230.223 with SMTP id j73mr912740weq.39.1316520697190; Tue, 20 Sep 2011 05:11:37 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from pastropnet.u-strasbg.fr (pastropnet.u-strasbg.fr. [130.79.90.87]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id gd6sm2037667wbb.1.2011.09.20.05.11.35 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=OTHER); Tue, 20 Sep 2011 05:11:36 -0700 (PDT)
Message-ID: <4E7882F6.3080604@jitsi.org>
Date: Tue, 20 Sep 2011 14:11:34 +0200
From: Emil Ivov <emcho@jitsi.org>
Organization: Jitsi
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; U; Intel Mac OS X 10.7; bg; rv:1.9.2.22) Gecko/20110902 Thunderbird/3.1.14
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Magnus Westerlund <magnus.westerlund@ericsson.com>
References: <4E76E8E8.2050102@ericsson.com>
In-Reply-To: <4E76E8E8.2050102@ericsson.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Cc: "rtcweb@ietf.org" <rtcweb@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [rtcweb] Call for Consensus on Use Case for Screen/Application/Desktop sharing
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: Tue, 20 Sep 2011 12:09:13 -0000

Hey there,

I support both A and B. I'd also be OK if they were optional (as far as
that's verifiable by remote peers of course).

Cheers,
Emil

На 19.09.11 09:02, Magnus Westerlund написа:
> WG,
> 
> There where some discussion in the Interim meeting last week about a
> Screen/Application/Desktop sharing support use case. My take away from
> the discussion is that this use cases is likely well enough understood
> to actually start a consensus call now. However, to us WG chairs it was
> clear that the use case in question actually needs to be split into two
> parts.
> 
> A) Where the RTCWEB enabled browser can use a local application window,
> the whole desktop or a Screen as a media source that can be encoded and
> transported over the peerConnection for displaying/playback at the peer.
>
> B) Where a remote peer can provide one or more input types such as mouse
> and keyboard to control the local system, not only including the
> browser, but also other operating system resources. This clearly can
> only happen after additional consent, most likely on a per occasion
> consent.
>
> My interpretation is that A only allows for application sharing in
> conferencing contexts, like in the WEBEX session the Interim meeting was
> held with where we shared slides. Where the combination of A and B is
> providing for VNC/Remote desktop.
> 
> Thus the question to the WG is the following.
> 
> 1) Do you support or object the inclusion of use case A, B or Both in
> our Use case document?
>
> 2) Do you have additional comments for or against either of the use cases?
> 
> 
> As WG chair
> 
> Magnus Westerlund
> 
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> Multimedia Technologies, Ericsson Research EAB/TVM
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> Ericsson AB                | Phone  +46 10 7148287
> Färögatan 6                | Mobile +46 73 0949079
> SE-164 80 Stockholm, Sweden| mailto: magnus.westerlund@ericsson.com
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> _______________________________________________
> rtcweb mailing list
> rtcweb@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rtcweb
> 

-- 
Emil Ivov, Ph.D.                       67000 Strasbourg,
Project Lead                           France
Jitsi
emcho@jitsi.org                        PHONE: +33.1.77.62.43.30
http://jitsi.org                       FAX:   +33.1.77.62.47.31