IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [rtcweb] TCP vs UDP for media

Eric Rescorla <ekr@rtfm.com> Tue, 15 May 2012 23:47 UTC

Return-Path: <ekr@rtfm.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 7914B11E80A1 for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 15 May 2012 16:47:30 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -102.977
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.977 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, FM_FORGED_GMAIL=0.622, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1, 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 byI7dx5qsyYL for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 15 May 2012 16:47:30 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-vb0-f44.google.com (mail-vb0-f44.google.com [209.85.212.44]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E6A1D11E8099 for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Tue, 15 May 2012 16:47:29 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by vbbez10 with SMTP id ez10so180135vbb.31 for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Tue, 15 May 2012 16:47:29 -0700 (PDT)
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:x-originating-ip:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc:content-type:x-gm-message-state; bh=hBxK6VmMYj6EjCqOFg5oTUoZzgfDyObP/LZq46Fb2e8=; b=N+XeR8G66TJagiLaaGLgq9SPeaMqNAQ7YvToxPwrl0oM60dAO10MGuwf2ZjYP93UMc RRgJkxkL4wctMQO24+91BxSUNeoePi7cllnC6gfPdU5g5x9OL/Ceq5tzJa3RRTN08UX3 eGe/C84/4/n46CYDnNDNzouBXUkPBBiidjbpw48IMv5pvybOV/EMz/oRu7ey0Er9ncjr L6lnZDfNBhsDD+KQvurZ0KXzMnuRAWAGGCLgEK/uT2Gx8Gdbw3Z63EhZ/b4jhsYD9LQW MHS9I5s85lK8oP6HHSDdSe2L0m3n77RIguMPev/rUtAET325AB3Sr5vhBW+xn/NC52zx 5fOA==
Received: by 10.52.100.229 with SMTP id fb5mr463154vdb.102.1337125649361; Tue, 15 May 2012 16:47:29 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.52.35.209 with HTTP; Tue, 15 May 2012 16:46:49 -0700 (PDT)
X-Originating-IP: [63.245.220.224]
In-Reply-To: <4FB2E8FC.40404@thaumas.net>
References: <B236B24082A4094A85003E8FFB8DDC3C1A45AE47@SOM-EXCH04.nuance.com> <4FB2E8FC.40404@thaumas.net>
From: Eric Rescorla <ekr@rtfm.com>
Date: Tue, 15 May 2012 16:46:49 -0700
Message-ID: <CABcZeBPWiGYaD6yBtBzeZMNgnz20JnHTyVHTev71KZagGRiqHw@mail.gmail.com>
To: Ralph Giles <giles@thaumas.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"
X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQkHI0vyB5AC6PbKYbjnZwk6aPnE33/p7GkEIzXm++MoqC0j/MTXCEiqEvs1OSmhXc7h/1xu
Cc: "rtcweb@ietf.org" <rtcweb@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [rtcweb] TCP vs UDP for media
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, 15 May 2012 23:47:30 -0000

On Tue, May 15, 2012 at 4:38 PM, Ralph Giles <giles@thaumas.net> wrote:
> On 12-05-15 4:22 PM, Young, Milan wrote:
>
>> I'm wondering if any thought has been given to TCP as a media transport.
>
> Where low latency transmission isn't an issue, one can generally fall
> back to established TCP-based protocols, like HTTP streaming and
> websockets, so we haven't really worried about that angle in the context
> of webrtc.
>
> Recording the stream is a requirement, so probably something could be
> built using that, merging recordings from each endpoint to fix up any
> dropped packets.

Agreed. This seems like something that could be done using just
getUserMedia() plus existing Web technologies.

-Ekr

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email