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

[Igor Faynberg <[e-mail]>]

On 8/23/2011 1:50 PM, Hutton, Andrew wrote:


> ...

> What I heard a number of times at IETF81 is that what people want is 
> to build innovative new applications with a real time media enabled 
> browser and to it seems clear to me we need a browser API which is 
> flexible and enables applications to do clever things with media 
> streams. So exploring some use cases which require the browser to 
> duplicate and copy media streams is a good idea.
Indeed the browser API must be flexible and it must enable 
applications.  Strong ++ on that.

Inasmuch as we, in the IETF, are not really in control of API, to ensure 
its flexibility we can only make the right protocol selection.   To this 
end, the worst thing would be trying to reinvent the wheel.  People have 
been working on SIPREC for more than a year now--would it be not wise on 
our part to take the output of that work?

Overall, even if the browser does not support the full-blown SIP, I 
think it must support some parts of it (REFER and SUBSCRIBE/NOTIFY, for 
one thing) in order to enable flexibility.

A few thousand messages ago, I asked how (asynchronous) notifications 
could be implemented without having SIP in the browser, and I don't 
think we had a sufficient discussion.

Igor
>
>