Re: [rtcweb] Sebastien Cubaud's non-ICE mechanism (Re: Summary of ICE discussion)

Tim Panton <tim@phonefromhere.com> Tue, 11 October 2011 09:34 UTC

Return-Path: <tim@phonefromhere.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 2898D21F8D02 for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 11 Oct 2011 02:34:09 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.598
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.598 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, HTML_MESSAGE=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 dOrVN2g3eCK7 for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 11 Oct 2011 02:34:08 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from zimbra.westhawk.co.uk (zimbra.westhawk.co.uk [192.67.4.167]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6E2D821F8CFE for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Tue, 11 Oct 2011 02:34:08 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [192.168.0.14] (unknown [93.89.81.113]) by zimbra.westhawk.co.uk (Postfix) with ESMTP id D018537A90C; Tue, 11 Oct 2011 10:46:54 +0100 (BST)
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1084)
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=Apple-Mail-13-716025862
From: Tim Panton <tim@phonefromhere.com>
In-Reply-To: <4E93C46B.1000902@jesup.org>
Date: Tue, 11 Oct 2011 10:34:02 +0100
Message-Id: <82BBE73E-B84C-49E5-B702-87857E7B7432@phonefromhere.com>
References: <4E8B192E.80809@ericsson.com> <E6AA070839B987489960B202AD80E18D019D9119@ftrdmel0.rd.francetelecom.fr> <4E935A8B.8020700@alvestrand.no> <CABcZeBNd0wnAv3KHkzCa4g6tFmGJhADOQDCz-7G=DYwp1yOGzA@mail.gmail.com> <4E9389C0.5050607@jesup.org> <4E93B43C.3060106@jdrosen.net> <4E93C46B.1000902@jesup.org>
To: Randell Jesup <randell-ietf@jesup.org>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1084)
Cc: rtcweb@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [rtcweb] Sebastien Cubaud's non-ICE mechanism (Re: Summary of ICE discussion)
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, 11 Oct 2011 09:34:09 -0000

On 11 Oct 2011, at 05:22, Randell Jesup wrote:
> 
> Is it workable?  I think so.  Is it worthwhile?  I don't know.  I'm somewhat skeptical since it solves only a subset of the problem space (for connecting to legacy devices/gateways).

I just want to add that in my experience it is a _small_ subset of the problem space. 
This group risks duplicating my costly mistake by assuming
that people want to connect to the PSTN/desk phones from their browser.

In general they don't. 
They want to communicate with other browser users on the same (or related) site(s).
That is the area we should be focussing on. If we get legacy interop too - great, but
PSTN interconnect really shouldn't be the deciding factor.

Tim.