Re: [rtcweb] Proposed text - remote recording use case

Matthew Kaufman <matthew.kaufman@skype.net> Tue, 13 September 2011 19:12 UTC

Return-Path: <matthew.kaufman@skype.net>
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 C6D7621F8B5F for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 13 Sep 2011 12:12:38 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -6.599
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4]
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 ZhrhGklpYG9H for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 13 Sep 2011 12:12:38 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mx.skype.net (mx.skype.net [78.141.177.88]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0183B21F8B5E for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Tue, 13 Sep 2011 12:12:37 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mx.skype.net (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mx.skype.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id DF1A07FD; Tue, 13 Sep 2011 21:14:43 +0200 (CEST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed; d=skype.net; h=message-id :date:from:mime-version:to:cc:subject:references:in-reply-to :content-type:content-transfer-encoding; s=mx; bh=p/B4BALPEVg41F MtjoLDFcS4G/c=; b=Nzo03FnkdEDXeQ1ah6lMRsD3k3LFpX2z3+0X8Qsg8xuVGa 3sVFFAoqgO/n53bpYAHXoOQGoxulE+zeqXbfJVCPEv4OoLAst56/gmUv3CCfwpYL qq7xnjsjFVHjZZZ5sliJ95WhT/O+bzYyQdCo7+v+QDFIQcbjO++nUPVMF5ecE=
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=skype.net; h=message-id:date:from :mime-version:to:cc:subject:references:in-reply-to:content-type: content-transfer-encoding; q=dns; s=mx; b=r1TP/840+MpJv5IrlllzWq 3uRzzFAMbkDd7ezZupCi83Nxrp9CIAwEEfrbjmPdvea6tvvtXGrctWvHUyTW8jGS ShPXKhJVIzn4UxY+/xXWlHxysedIY5JyV4t3Kc+HBvo7yMb/5E4yK31QMfPGHaxC PCF0ZhG8DDNTbNTzggwEY=
Received: from zimbra.skype.net (zimbra.skype.net [78.141.177.82]) by mx.skype.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id DCA747F6; Tue, 13 Sep 2011 21:14:43 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by zimbra.skype.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id B411B3507072; Tue, 13 Sep 2011 21:14:43 +0200 (CEST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at lu2-zimbra.skype.net
Received: from zimbra.skype.net ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (zimbra.skype.net [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id buDRtu6LWQ6h; Tue, 13 Sep 2011 21:14:43 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from Matthew-Kaufman-Air.local (gw2.rival.se [83.241.158.140]) by zimbra.skype.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id A0CBF3506DB5; Tue, 13 Sep 2011 21:14:42 +0200 (CEST)
Message-ID: <4E6FABA2.10506@skype.net>
Date: Tue, 13 Sep 2011 21:14:42 +0200
From: Matthew Kaufman <matthew.kaufman@skype.net>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.6; rv:6.0.2) Gecko/20110902 Thunderbird/6.0.2
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Hadriel Kaplan <HKaplan@acmepacket.com>
References: <A444A0F8084434499206E78C106220CA0B04921B16@MCHP058A.global-ad.net> <4E6F6624.3070809@alvestrand.no> <085A341A-9B3D-4DC8-8685-CD9DF811E102@acmepacket.com>
In-Reply-To: <085A341A-9B3D-4DC8-8685-CD9DF811E102@acmepacket.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Cc: "rtcweb@ietf.org" <rtcweb@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [rtcweb] Proposed text - remote recording use case
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: Tue, 13 Sep 2011 19:12:40 -0000

On 9/13/11 6:15 PM, Hadriel Kaplan wrote:
> Actually, I think remote recording may already be possible without anything new.
>
> Draft-ietf-rtcweb-use-cases-and-requirements-04 has a use-case 4.2.7 for "Multiparty video communication", and associated requirements.  All you need for remote recording is the ability for the javascript to create a separate media stream to the recorder (SRS), as if the SRS were a third participant, and fork the user's audio/video into both streams.  The 4.2.7 requirement implies that will be possible.

Correct.

>
> What's not handled by that is replicating the received audio/video from the peer into the recording stream to the SRS - i.e., the browser will be able to fork the locally generated media, but not the media received from the peer.

And I believe that enabling browsers to do that would be a very bad 
idea. That is specifically why the requirement for recording should be 
careful to explain the difference between these two and why one might be 
acceptable while the other not.

Matthew Kaufman