Re: [rtcweb] WG Action: Rechartered Real-Time Communication in WEB-browsers (rtcweb)

Ted Hardie <> Fri, 19 February 2021 18:11 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6FBCE3A12C3; Fri, 19 Feb 2021 10:11:07 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.097
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.097 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key)
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Qf_RWgXxUgWP; Fri, 19 Feb 2021 10:11:05 -0800 (PST)
Received: from ( [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::333]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 6D7053A12C5; Fri, 19 Feb 2021 10:11:05 -0800 (PST)
Received: by with SMTP id 80so5907836oty.2; Fri, 19 Feb 2021 10:11:05 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=TrjmdMoC3v+/Q2eCdhVvjA0g483Ar2o3HlFDP0YlQu8=; b=HQ1F35OPegKIIjJY72zxIiDf3cGbJlskF/vtPTBGGBVvhOXfGocl5RMRg/O36nz89E nkhTB4PR8hbYeWstEJK1qxjEHdzcjpbFU3rgupURtL2oBM1NAJYP8DDctI858iGjcjn+ UvTPol8Ox0mA7CFy9kl/f+QlULORMA8hUITucA7yz6jhXB/ZQ6qc2VuYGEpqeIf1bLWO ppzp8PDzhLY86CiSzOaFWvmUM7umsuZ+iY35T+Obd5k0oBex7bLlC75Mxs8/VWFaHrxH A4pzG7p9kAxWVVXWW0YoeEGH9FnS3Mgka7Sc3POgyYKTyWSfa3VQeIP+1OIrhiYKvLpC S1ow==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=TrjmdMoC3v+/Q2eCdhVvjA0g483Ar2o3HlFDP0YlQu8=; b=rpahoHdEnJj3Nwz4gRKy2pdDVgIrzMfne8dJjEh5dU04MK2/vA7dfOsCHGJRbqNWX4 7hxcWF5mCocxW2u+N/TAu8Y2k29+kvOD0teKCejDq5z7xSYdGiVMe5Vw2YlWAF/p6f9O 8Ei80xEFlcO2+h5Y6vA5Rp/iYsUNeFPADRBcj2DQY4YI/9j7fN1ZLERKN3340XIeMxVM CYqdQvGgq0vYMxKUFoRQ9nDr0V7v15ou8BrehS9MPOZ5FIhi45JJLd7RoAUkf5IYp8np Qr+4+ogjfG+YqgMXIxTumgMRhh7BIrk7V7QfBHQKDSCaqPn3KGTkJzhbeE6YBV/H97Tt WILA==
X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJwYbqdPDeu9rSKIMcj7jvs0Pmcsnf9UtLSZn84Sx6EVvWKsudrVTTC5Ba8hBHeeDx8fAZJlyJnQBOtCdWIexSY=
X-Received: by 2002:a9d:4d84:: with SMTP id u4mr6332048otk.165.1613758264454; Fri, 19 Feb 2021 10:11:04 -0800 (PST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <>
In-Reply-To: <>
From: Ted Hardie <>
Date: Fri, 19 Feb 2021 10:10:38 -0800
Message-ID: <>
To: RTCWeb IETF <>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="0000000000001b313305bbb46071"
Archived-At: <>
Subject: Re: [rtcweb] WG Action: Rechartered Real-Time Communication in WEB-browsers (rtcweb)
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: Real-Time Communication in WEB-browsers working group list <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 19 Feb 2021 18:11:07 -0000

And we're back.

This is hopefully for a limited engagement, as the charter is quite pointed
on what we have to do.

We do have a meeting slot at IETF 110, Friday March 12, 12:00 UTC (the
first slot on the final day, in other words). The bulk of the time will be
spent on the handling of "m=" sections that are designated as bundle-only.
If you want to present on this, please send a note to the WG as soon as
possible.  If you have some other agenda item, please let Sean and me know,
and we'll discuss it with you.


Ted and Sean

On Fri, Feb 19, 2021 at 9:42 AM The IESG <> wrote:

> The Real-Time Communication in WEB-browsers (rtcweb) WG in the Applications
> and Real-Time Area of the IETF has been rechartered. For additional
> information, please contact the Area Directors or the WG Chairs.
> Real-Time Communication in WEB-browsers (rtcweb)
> -----------------------------------------------------------------------
> Current status: Proposed WG
> Chairs:
>   Sean Turner <>
>   Ted Hardie <>
> Assigned Area Director:
>   Murray Kucherawy <>
> Applications and Real-Time Area Directors:
>   Barry Leiba <>
>   Murray Kucherawy <>
> Mailing list:
>   Address:
>   To subscribe:
>   Archive:
> Group page:
> Charter:
> The RTCWEB working group was originally chartered to standardize mechanisms
> that provide direct interactive rich communication using audio, video,
> collaboration, games, etc. between two peers' web-browsers, without
> requiring
> non-standard extensions or proprietary plug-ins.  The result was a set of
> RFCs from RTCWEB, in addition to many other RFCs from other working groups,
> all of which are interrelated and had to be published together in what the
> RFC Editor refers to as a “cluster”.  In the end, that cluster comprised
> more
> than 40 RFCs and was finally published in January 2021.
> During the run-up to publication of the cluster, a contradiction was
> identified between what became RFCs 8829 and 8843.  A description of this
> contradiction was added to both documents to highlight the problem, and
> state
> our intention to proceed with publication but quickly initiate an effort to
> publish updates to the affected documents.
> The key part of the added text was as follows:
> “The specific issue involves the handling of "m=" sections that are
> designated as bundle-only, as discussed in Section 4.1.1 of [RFC 8829].
> Currently, there is divergence between JSEP and BUNDLE, as well as between
> these specifications and existing browser implementations …”
> The working group is being reconstituted to take up this contradiction,
> come
> to consensus on a resolution, and issue Standards Track updates for those
> two
> documents.  Specifically, the goal of this work is to address only the
> contradictions regarding "bundle-only" between BUNDLE and JSEP.  The
> resulting aligned solution should avoid impacting the interoperability with
> SDP Offer/Answer.  Finally, the impact on existing implementations that are
> affected by any change is to be considered.
> draft-ietf-rtcweb-sdp, which has not yet been published, will be returned
> to
> the working group to be updated according to the resolution of the issue
> described above.  The working group will therefore produce updates to the
> JSEP and BUNDLE documents, and re-submit draft-ietf-rtcweb-sdp for
> publication after it has been revised.  Updating any other document, or
> taking up any other issue, is out of scope and will require IESG approval
> via
> rechartering.
> Coordination with the MMUSIC working group to develop this solution will be
> required.
> Milestones:
>   Aug 2021 - Update to draft-ietf-rtcweb-sdp to the IESG as Informational.
>   Aug 2021 - Updates to the JSEP and BUNDLE documents to the IESG as
> Proposed
>   Standard.