IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [rtcweb] Proposed Plan for Usage of SDP and RTP - Lower level API minus SDP

Roman Shpount <roman@telurix.com> Thu, 07 March 2013 21:46 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 8E85821F8AF2 for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 7 Mar 2013 13:46:42 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.977
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.977 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, FM_FORGED_GMAIL=0.622, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, NO_RELAYS=-0.001]
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 AlEVM0lKdbEc for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 7 Mar 2013 13:46:42 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-we0-x22c.google.com (mail-we0-x22c.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:400c:c03::22c]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7B9EA21F8AB8 for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Thu, 7 Mar 2013 13:46:41 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-we0-f172.google.com with SMTP id d46so221451wer.31 for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Thu, 07 Mar 2013 13:46:40 -0800 (PST)
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=20120113; h=x-received:mime-version:x-received:in-reply-to:references:date :message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type:x-gm-message-state; bh=7g+dv7W35M2849CxScS+Vil+Zi7z8YhICS1BvfBpdJE=; b=UW+6SsdFseV5NbhMemPj21gMhlNqubEsUFR5noDkTeqMArxE3AUneL5xgBDoJIAvNF n1K3IV2SxY3YiSU6rjkvF+U65gddGPmey/LjQk4mpT0aoBDrj8GVrigUY9MnlUTrGFRt Tr8gp7KGiFLCiJjYEqWJ0OyYlNtlzl29ynlyTxq+HrMet2/VMVXdicqlgGr3ewXzG0H6 4Vb44pwcYCOo33Lq0Lxmq7tb4ZJHCDkhA3AAGF8RrFYliqkd/AQCC3Dk0hqjCL1UvMhI 2dvGF63ms8e+ScMZwJf0Vsd/4xtmQQYftL+TjFa6raf+fCZvDpDiMjpPwCt/STdCLOmf ySug==
X-Received: by 10.180.100.169 with SMTP id ez9mr36845946wib.3.1362692800492; Thu, 07 Mar 2013 13:46:40 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-wi0-x229.google.com ([2a00:1450:400c:c05::229]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id n10sm5723061wia.0.2013.03.07.13.46.39 (version=TLSv1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA bits=128/128); Thu, 07 Mar 2013 13:46:39 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-wi0-f169.google.com with SMTP id l13so3952073wie.2 for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Thu, 07 Mar 2013 13:46:38 -0800 (PST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.194.76.37 with SMTP id h5mr58209470wjw.21.1362692798578; Thu, 07 Mar 2013 13:46:38 -0800 (PST)
Received: by 10.217.107.135 with HTTP; Thu, 7 Mar 2013 13:46:38 -0800 (PST)
In-Reply-To: <CAJrXDUFy4u5B5AmG8xGN5SfNOe4HduJFunvQC_ht=5NOUYYjLA@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CD5D3F35.B22B%robin@hookflash.com> <B9549E2E-6E68-4F34-A9C0-1F050285A70A@acmepacket.com> <CAJrXDUGSMfQ=SNrSxKVvay=4JUXHULy0cO2pRN9+iFJ23doWZQ@mail.gmail.com> <CAJrXDUHvcsuN6vXs8wku_aUrs-siHdn2wBDOJBgpgDPJySgdSg@mail.gmail.com> <CABcZeBMt7vaMnhcDD0-U7n6Hn-T=sHcGUGEV4=vAs8DVcoi-CQ@mail.gmail.com> <CAJrXDUGqxDxS5=_YnLOWVT6xOgXYuspGS5U2gXevc+PP2vLdHw@mail.gmail.com> <CALiegfnZKVOgmh_5Qb2HeXuAL1BdxDc=U-=t1NfEEMC4DHMUew@mail.gmail.com> <CAJrXDUEK9DCMfxOoq-8HPQwjTZrVvW-CEZJzte_gzyUs16hJuw@mail.gmail.com> <CALiegfmTWZ0dDjfuUixL3nOpZ0LEs30TSOi1iFw7MW94qkD-JQ@mail.gmail.com> <CAJrXDUFy4u5B5AmG8xGN5SfNOe4HduJFunvQC_ht=5NOUYYjLA@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 07 Mar 2013 16:46:38 -0500
Message-ID: <CAD5OKxt0DmadedrS1fGT_gnGboxeFx9hhBoTGLkxk0vy01K0Kw@mail.gmail.com>
From: Roman Shpount <roman@telurix.com>
To: Peter Thatcher <pthatcher@google.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="047d7bb03bc43288c004d75ca401"
X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQmMhTpgcAqpv20NoluWKLvHer8xCrD2hwC6DwTpDr0MPCZvbdT593Esdy3Qbag+HJNJmJEZ
Cc: "<rtcweb@ietf.org>" <rtcweb@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [rtcweb] Proposed Plan for Usage of SDP and RTP - Lower level API minus SDP
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: Thu, 07 Mar 2013 21:46:42 -0000

I do not think redefining session description is the best approach. Having
access to direct API methods that control send codecs, send media types,
resolution, etc  is easier to understand and to program. I think even
simply exposing the API from Voice and Video engines in current WebRTC
implementation would be a more usable API then the current offer/answer SDP
based one.
_____________
Roman Shpount


On Thu, Mar 7, 2013 at 4:37 PM, Peter Thatcher <pthatcher@google.com> wrote:

> Having a minimal SessionDescription command and then a
> "SessionDescription update message" that says "I'm adding new video
> now" or "I'm disabling the video
> right now" absolutely can and should be a part of a better
> SessionDescription format.  I think that's a good idea and very
> doable.
>
>
>
>
>
> On Thu, Mar 7, 2013 at 1:33 PM, Iñaki Baz Castillo <ibc@aliax.net> wrote:
> > 2013/3/7 Peter Thatcher <pthatcher@google.com>:
> >> So, would you like a SessionDescription to send to the other side that
> >> is flexible and manageable, such as a JSON object?
> >
> > If I have to receive the *entire* JSON / rawSDP /
> > whateverSessionDescription again with minimal changes just for
> > enabling/disabling video, I don't like it since it means that I must
> > "compare" the current SD with the new one.
> >
> > I don't care whether the format is raw SDP, JSON or whatever. What I
> > would like is that I can establish an audio/video session with a peer
> > and, at some time, I can send a *minimal* SD "command" / "RPC" to say
> > the remote "Hi I am dissabling the video right now".
> >
> >
> > --
> > Iñaki Baz Castillo
> > <ibc@aliax.net>
> _______________________________________________
> rtcweb mailing list
> rtcweb@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rtcweb
>

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email