Re: [rtcweb] Rejecting MediaStreamTracks in JSEP

Justin Uberti <juberti@google.com> Mon, 03 February 2014 20:20 UTC

Return-Path: <juberti@google.com>
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 C22581A0225 for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 3 Feb 2014 12:20:06 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -0.713
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.713 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FM_FORGED_GMAIL=0.622, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, J_CHICKENPOX_14=0.6, J_CHICKENPOX_15=0.6, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.535, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=no
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 HflDUG0od1SQ for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 3 Feb 2014 12:20:05 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-vc0-x234.google.com (mail-vc0-x234.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400c:c03::234]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5C30B1A021D for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Mon, 3 Feb 2014 12:20:05 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-vc0-f180.google.com with SMTP id ks9so5010598vcb.25 for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Mon, 03 Feb 2014 12:20:05 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc:content-type; bh=hyHV1p33oWqUnhv6hNwqKFmkzV21u0JIh4zXil06+Wc=; b=giGn4kDrI4TnC7VF5lnQllhYZwc1/wozmWYbg+QHfRb1NSi0QrR5IL4CHmcnvy7qBh 0tJ3Xb+fj4Ga27xZbQi/uvZJp6a+/r6CB1HOJEabWvvOEoDvBIoq5hOwAnYwkgpm/w9x 5yDgR/bNX/JA5ebWUqjI5EPP8t/n55CNG/qeCv7pP7a0bVop9bqCOn2L/9jZkGNo+VwK zeF9ax52HbSRduQaWC4Z15m1+d8x6x6I97Kv7fhQZEXBeKTzUlCpGE6SDweEsh/jHrGR VEHcp/hCCayphcGT24vkFIMJ4308+yi9QgwPASwW9g+hOFlgYszFqPi/1Bp95IsYOK0w wKHg==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc:content-type; bh=hyHV1p33oWqUnhv6hNwqKFmkzV21u0JIh4zXil06+Wc=; b=KngPgYisSMHYZ9YsN6IgQs+R340Q78vDfEmGRf49F0/Q1CSip9KY5RPBlzFhPwF0uW TxIDd2FYuRbL+gpoEwdeRbR6RNrLVAx7lCEjxIg0tCANoND4amboqU9CBwcZab0XtuO6 H6hkBTzjEcRnOPASmEmSvVdYC65sMOOa7IcUhpXEKYtID7Nb8eIN/jQEQXt3OzSHfcyY AJbhrD9OGMQgkoL6dspzD11dszZ8gVq1TvJdOrsLEaSwqbljgYc954UlGPDWwz5n1p+8 FPprzWO/t0zYQO8cVRV9iwaBwAyxaCldm0SQpW4GOZCWsAp2RuBDKAq+lzJMI6TE3Suj YnEw==
X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQmF2Qq9U+qg98vqADMGE6VxLUp6x3wqYzLUTGTCCCtj+is2puLFvn+aC9nqDWarQPgxadXv2/EDWRjZJVy3cyXnH9gKPIUOEOGoOFpsUjlMBT+BqdcF93RccmI6YGT/YwdOFwmooOTvgwKcrNKa5EGGaYk/1BslU13flhyb1AzGSBnLojvL/qgMSrpZEAOJDsvlJdEW
X-Received: by 10.58.90.202 with SMTP id by10mr28822294veb.6.1391458805017; Mon, 03 Feb 2014 12:20:05 -0800 (PST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.52.89.170 with HTTP; Mon, 3 Feb 2014 12:19:44 -0800 (PST)
In-Reply-To: <CABkgnnWjk1LK-RH2i_=krKcFQ9bHrcpd=Yg=9Z-jZGTKP7dYRw@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAOJ7v-22T7hLMdC2je0nLk34MXQ8L+JFWLtAz--6Ryt+DMaMvQ@mail.gmail.com> <CABkgnnWjk1LK-RH2i_=krKcFQ9bHrcpd=Yg=9Z-jZGTKP7dYRw@mail.gmail.com>
From: Justin Uberti <juberti@google.com>
Date: Mon, 03 Feb 2014 12:19:44 -0800
Message-ID: <CAOJ7v-13EKNnT9OAGhy1VPhtjURYxgDJM606gSOVFu9bQ5-KBQ@mail.gmail.com>
To: Martin Thomson <martin.thomson@gmail.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="001a1136a478cb09ac04f1863ff7"
Cc: Cullen Jennings <fluffy@cisco.com>, "rtcweb@ietf.org" <rtcweb@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [rtcweb] Rejecting MediaStreamTracks in JSEP
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: Mon, 03 Feb 2014 20:20:07 -0000

On Mon, Feb 3, 2014 at 12:06 PM, Martin Thomson <martin.thomson@gmail.com>wrote:

> On 3 February 2014 11:27, Justin Uberti <juberti@google.com> wrote:
> > 2a) Normal answer: B adds its own track MSTB, generates answer:
> > m=audio Y
> > a=msid:MSTB
> > a=recv-appId:1
>
> Potential problems:
>
> recv-appId looks like something that applies to what B is receiving
>

It does, in fact. In B's answer, a=msid indicates what B is sending;
a=recv-appId indicates that B wants to receive the MST from A that is
associated with this m-line.


> reject looks a little like does not support recv-appid as well
>

True. But if, as you say, we merge appid and msid, then the only possible
ambiguity comes from the legacy no-msid, no-appid case, and even that is
not an issue since all the possible outcomes are separable: full duplex
(m=audio Y), one-way reject (m=audio Y, a=sendonly), full reject (m=audio
0). Of course, we can't know that the one-way reject is final, but the
number of add/remove stream operations done by legacy devices should be
limited.


> I think that the merging appid/msid is worth considering.  I think
> that gets around these minor issues.