[rtcweb] Unified Plan for SDP Handling

Adam Roach <adam@nostrum.com> Mon, 15 July 2013 19:05 UTC

Return-Path: <adam@nostrum.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 EAC6711E823B; Mon, 15 Jul 2013 12:05:34 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -102.6
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.6 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, SPF_PASS=-0.001, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
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 SvLWPgGQpNgt; Mon, 15 Jul 2013 12:05:33 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from shaman.nostrum.com (nostrum-pt.tunnel.tserv2.fmt.ipv6.he.net [IPv6:2001:470:1f03:267::2]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id AD0B221E810A; Mon, 15 Jul 2013 12:04:47 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from Orochi.local (99-152-145-110.lightspeed.dllstx.sbcglobal.net [99.152.145.110]) (authenticated bits=0) by shaman.nostrum.com (8.14.3/8.14.3) with ESMTP id r6FJ4k1N035254 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-CAMELLIA256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Mon, 15 Jul 2013 14:04:46 -0500 (CDT) (envelope-from adam@nostrum.com)
Message-ID: <51E447C8.1000701@nostrum.com>
Date: Mon, 15 Jul 2013 14:04:40 -0500
From: Adam Roach <adam@nostrum.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.8; rv:17.0) Gecko/20130620 Thunderbird/17.0.7
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: "mmusic@ietf.org" <mmusic@ietf.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received-SPF: pass (shaman.nostrum.com: 99.152.145.110 is authenticated by a trusted mechanism)
Cc: "rtcweb@ietf.org" <rtcweb@ietf.org>
Subject: [rtcweb] Unified Plan for SDP Handling
X-BeenThere: rtcweb@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
Reply-To: "mmusic@ietf.org" <mmusic@ietf.org>
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, 15 Jul 2013 19:05:35 -0000

[Cross-posting to RTCWEB; follow-ups to MMUSIC, please]

After significant work, Justin, Martin and I have managed to produce a 
compromise plan that provides a high degree of interoperability with 
existing devices (and future non-WebRTC devices) while not being 
excessively onerous for WebRTC implementations or applications that use 
them. It's been a tricky balancing act, but I think we've found a good 
mix between the two that can form a solid basis for the working group to 
move forward.

Rather than summarize the key points of the document in this email, I 
direct interested parties to section 2 of the document, which summarizes 
the key aspects of the plan in eight relatively concise bullet points.

I apologize for the late publication date of this document -- there's 
actually been a lot more work put into coming up with a unified draft 
than I originally anticipated, and the production of this document took 
at least two weeks longer than I expected it to.

Note that this document is intended to be a plan for the work to be done 
in this area, and not a specification in itself. The intention is that 
its contents are used as the basis for work in several other drafts -- 
some new, some not -- that form the corpus of work necessary for RTCWEB 
(and potentially CLUE) to move forward. Except in rare cases, the 
document does not attempt to explicitly call out venues or documents for 
such work, as we (or, at the very least, I) anticipate guidance from the 
various working group chairs to assist in such decisions.

Comments prior to Berlin would be very helpful, although this will 
clearly be a point of significant discussion at the face-to-face meeting.

Document link:

http://www.ietf.org/id/draft-roach-mmusic-unified-plan-00.txt

/a