Re: [rtcweb] Requesting "SDP or not SDP" debate to be re-opened
Robin Raymond <robin@hookflash.com> Tue, 18 June 2013 22:58 UTC
Return-Path: <robin@hookflash.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 72E8921E8094 for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 18 Jun 2013 15:58:08 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.643
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.643 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.655, BAYES_00=-2.599, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, MIME_8BIT_HEADER=0.3]
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 rWDtQbXjBxv5 for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 18 Jun 2013 15:58:02 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-ie0-x22f.google.com (mail-ie0-x22f.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4001:c03::22f]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2EF7E21E80ED for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Tue, 18 Jun 2013 15:57:57 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-ie0-f175.google.com with SMTP id a13so11534485iee.20 for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Tue, 18 Jun 2013 15:57:55 -0700 (PDT)
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=20120113; h=message-id:date:from:user-agent:mime-version:to:cc:subject :references:in-reply-to:content-type:x-gm-message-state; bh=6f+9LDP57jNhjs2JbHaiJWisgnki5BtckUnGimiiyKM=; b=Uw0ZJntyYyBUmPOLCQ6rQsbHFeE1es9Ywf49qt1yJZ4mUgxWGaXYIScyrkdO/OpAqe ttOml6nwFGjWgeuXJQH6E6Av/j4apRQZitTNL4pylM6keuiRgktPQFfS1P0WEa8IwC3U WJsOG6PgG9hdb/4/0itBgfeCxXahkZ2ZeSEW5hY7a7kXxX8EbXMzJg+cyME29GrrBU7k 47t/AHo2GQcsaImsvVN4xqLDnYM2EPkweuIlhIbAcPQYJ3Ik4Nyc+mkP4ZV5ih2QOWrg 9JHf10ohVKXsCaBPYP6Kc0QU6rXcsX3auSQpk2EuDq/gz3cxGE9EM+zH3J68u4PXvQqp e3fg==
X-Received: by 10.50.56.50 with SMTP id x18mr8985304igp.87.1371596275715; Tue, 18 Jun 2013 15:57:55 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from Robins-MacBook-Pro.local (CPE602ad08742f7-CM602ad08742f4.cpe.net.cable.rogers.com. [99.224.116.224]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPSA id ji5sm3295666igb.0.2013.06.18.15.57.53 for <multiple recipients> (version=TLSv1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA bits=128/128); Tue, 18 Jun 2013 15:57:54 -0700 (PDT)
Message-ID: <51C0E5EF.3010701@hookflash.com>
Date: Tue, 18 Jun 2013 18:57:51 -0400
From: Robin Raymond <robin@hookflash.com>
User-Agent: Postbox 3.0.8 (Macintosh/20130427)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Iñaki Baz Castillo <ibc@aliax.net>
References: <CALiegfkajJPxWZTzjYssP91VW+StStLpxoxGCkjOLKDMUWc0rA@mail.gmail.com> <CA+9kkMDk2L3SBPC08WU_5RcL16-Wzv8Mocj3-Qzmxz2E24ERGg@mail.gmail.com> <51C0C1A0.9010107@nostrum.com> <CAJrXDUGqSvsosZJhcRR-kCwEX1g_wvPnSZPmmcNwggk+Z9WNCA@mail.gmail.com> <CABkgnnWfV=5xBaRqAddqUURThs9J4T4+0HK4Ux07VA51r5oC3Q@mail.gmail.com> <CAD5OKxtKbUYtdtaTg26nKUxK_UFHch1JU+yw1iH4iZ5Atbz=OA@mail.gmail.com> <CALiegfkp6vf+EYtA0cNfj-9p59pmjZcMFtq_c=tw5r3xYwKhaQ@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CALiegfkp6vf+EYtA0cNfj-9p59pmjZcMFtq_c=tw5r3xYwKhaQ@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="------------020106050800080709080401"
X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQk0ly68S5RfuQFWwNXM6r3EhmdInUmEG65WCXpuM+/l9DuEF1P0QHlX9lIaK1g140iK/wfu
Cc: "rtcweb@ietf.org" <rtcweb@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [rtcweb] Requesting "SDP or not SDP" debate to be re-opened
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, 18 Jun 2013 22:58:09 -0000
+1 Exactly. Spot on. -Robin > Iñaki Baz Castillo <mailto:ibc@aliax.net> > 18 June, 2013 6:51 PM > > > Very good point. That exactly what we need: something like a JS > wrapper of the native internal media API. > > > > -- > Iñaki Baz Castillo > <ibc@aliax.net> > _______________________________________________ > rtcweb mailing list > rtcweb@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rtcweb > Roman Shpount <mailto:roman@telurix.com> > 18 June, 2013 6:40 PM > One thing I got to mention is that there is already an API used > internally in current WebRTC implementations: Voice and Video Engines. > Both of those take external network transports (which also have their > interfaces defined and abstract ICE/SRTP/DTLS-SRTP) and allow to > specify what codecs to be used to receive/end media and how this media > is encoded. The APIs provided by these components are fairly typical > for the media library APIs that are used to build SIP and other real > time communications clients. In fact these very APIs were used by (at > least at some point in the past) Skype, Google Talk, Yahoo Messenger > and number of other real time clients. I think the best way to build a > usable API is to try to wrap this in JavaScript as closely as possible > instead of building something extremely complicated on top of them. If > we do this, we can create something that will make the job easier for > both browser developers (no complex, hard to test, code which > implements O/A) and for application developers (clear API level > contract with clear mechanisms to control things happening with the > media). We already know that these APIs work for what we need. Let's > stop trying to hide them behind O/A complexity, and then try to invent > multiple creative ways to implement exactly the same functions through > all the layers we built on top. > > _____________ > Roman Shpount > > _______________________________________________ > rtcweb mailing list > rtcweb@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rtcweb > Martin Thomson <mailto:martin.thomson@gmail.com> > 18 June, 2013 6:25 PM > I agree with Peter, except for this bit: > > Adam is much harder to confuse than you think, or than he professes. > > Speaking of burning it all down and starting over. If you want a > house-related analogy, that's not quite correct. It's refusing to > build an extension because the old house, while legally fit for > habitation, is falling down around your ears. Since you only need > foundations, it's not that big a job (though I'll grant you that it's > bigger than many people realize, even with that smaller scope). > _______________________________________________ > rtcweb mailing list > rtcweb@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rtcweb > Peter Thatcher <mailto:pthatcher@google.com> > 18 June, 2013 6:16 PM > Adam, I think you're confused. As Ted pointed out, there are two > different uses of SDP: 1. as a control surface, 2. as a message > format for signalling. SDPNG was trying to replace SDP for #2. While > I believe this thread was started entirely focused on #1. So you're > talking about different things. > > So far the only time spent on trying to replace or avoid SDP for #1 > has been "comment 22", and to a lesser extent the proposal I just made > for adding 2 methods to PeerConnection (createLocalStream and > createRemoteStream). I think it's incorrect to conclude that we > should never try to improve #1 just because other in the past failed > to replace #2. They're very different. > > I also don't think we should burn down WebRTC and start over, but > despite what some seem to think, we don't have to choose between "burn > it down" and "never improve it". There are many options other than > the two extremes. > > > > By the way, a gentle reminder: SDP is not the only way to do #2. I > work on a rather large system almost entirely build around Jingle, > without a hint of SDP, and it works just fine. Much better than SDP > would have, I think. Just because SDPNG didn't work out doesn't mean > there will never be any way other to do signalling than SDP. > > > > > _______________________________________________ > rtcweb mailing list > rtcweb@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rtcweb > Adam Roach <mailto:adam@nostrum.com> > 18 June, 2013 4:22 PM > > > Many men have died on that hill. I'm still sad about the colossal time > and talent sink represented by these 61 pages: > > http://tools.ietf.org/id/draft-ietf-mmusic-sdpng-08.txt > > I have no reason to think that burning WebRTC down the the ground and > starting over would produce a different result. If anything, the > issues are more contentious now than they were in 2005. > > /a > _______________________________________________ > rtcweb mailing list > rtcweb@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rtcweb
- Re: [rtcweb] Requesting "SDP or not SDP" debate t… Robin Raymond
- Re: [rtcweb] Requesting "SDP or not SDP" debate t… Roman Shpount
- Re: [rtcweb] Requesting "SDP or not SDP" debate t… Alexandre GOUAILLARD
- [rtcweb] Requesting "SDP or not SDP" debate to be… Iñaki Baz Castillo
- Re: [rtcweb] Requesting "SDP or not SDP" debate t… Erik Lagerway
- Re: [rtcweb] Requesting "SDP or not SDP" debate t… Ted Hardie
- Re: [rtcweb] Requesting "SDP or not SDP" debate t… Adam Roach
- Re: [rtcweb] Requesting "SDP or not SDP" debate t… Matthew Kaufman (SKYPE)
- Re: [rtcweb] Requesting "SDP or not SDP" debate t… Iñaki Baz Castillo
- Re: [rtcweb] Requesting "SDP or not SDP" debate t… Robin Raymond
- Re: [rtcweb] Requesting "SDP or not SDP" debate t… Peter Thatcher
- Re: [rtcweb] Requesting "SDP or not SDP" debate t… Martin Thomson
- Re: [rtcweb] Requesting "SDP or not SDP" debate t… Roman Shpount
- Re: [rtcweb] Requesting "SDP or not SDP" debate t… Iñaki Baz Castillo
- Re: [rtcweb] Requesting "SDP or not SDP" debate t… Robin Raymond
- Re: [rtcweb] Requesting "SDP or not SDP" debate t… Peter Thatcher
- Re: [rtcweb] Requesting "SDP or not SDP" debate t… Christer Holmberg
- Re: [rtcweb] Requesting "SDP or not SDP" debate t… Peter Thatcher
- Re: [rtcweb] Requesting "SDP or not SDP" debate t… Christer Holmberg
- Re: [rtcweb] Requesting "SDP or not SDP" debate t… Iñaki Baz Castillo
- Re: [rtcweb] Requesting "SDP or not SDP" debate t… Christer Holmberg
- Re: [rtcweb] Requesting "SDP or not SDP" debate t… Iñaki Baz Castillo
- Re: [rtcweb] Requesting "SDP or not SDP" debate t… Robin Raymond
- Re: [rtcweb] Requesting "SDP or not SDP" debate t… Peter Thatcher
- Re: [rtcweb] Requesting "SDP or not SDP" debate t… Iñaki Baz Castillo
- Re: [rtcweb] Requesting "SDP or not SDP" debate t… Peter Thatcher
- Re: [rtcweb] Requesting "SDP or not SDP" debate t… Matthew Kaufman
- Re: [rtcweb] Requesting "SDP or not SDP" debate t… Peter Thatcher
- Re: [rtcweb] Requesting "SDP or not SDP" debate t… Peter Thatcher
- Re: [rtcweb] Requesting "SDP or not SDP" debate t… Iñaki Baz Castillo
- Re: [rtcweb] Requesting "SDP or not SDP" debate t… Iñaki Baz Castillo
- Re: [rtcweb] Requesting "SDP or not SDP" debate t… Peter Thatcher
- Re: [rtcweb] Priorities - Was: Requesting "SDP or… Hutton, Andrew
- Re: [rtcweb] Requesting "SDP or not SDP" debate t… Iñaki Baz Castillo
- Re: [rtcweb] Requesting "SDP or not SDP" debate t… Peter Thatcher
- Re: [rtcweb] Requesting "SDP or not SDP" debate t… Iñaki Baz Castillo
- Re: [rtcweb] Requesting "SDP or not SDP" debate t… Peter Thatcher
- Re: [rtcweb] Requesting "SDP or not SDP" debate t… Iñaki Baz Castillo
- Re: [rtcweb] Requesting "SDP or not SDP" debate t… Matthew Kaufman
- Re: [rtcweb] Requesting "SDP or not SDP" debate t… Matthew Kaufman (SKYPE)
- Re: [rtcweb] Requesting "SDP or not SDP" debate t… Robin Raymond
- Re: [rtcweb] Requesting "SDP or not SDP" debate t… Matthew Kaufman (SKYPE)
- Re: [rtcweb] Requesting "SDP or not SDP" debate t… Peter Thatcher
- Re: [rtcweb] Requesting "SDP or not SDP" debate t… Matthew Kaufman
- Re: [rtcweb] Requesting "SDP or not SDP" debate t… Peter Thatcher
- Re: [rtcweb] Requesting "SDP or not SDP" debate t… Peter Thatcher
- Re: [rtcweb] Requesting "SDP or not SDP" debate t… Peter Thatcher
- Re: [rtcweb] Requesting "SDP or not SDP" debate t… Peter Thatcher
- Re: [rtcweb] Requesting "SDP or not SDP" debate t… Christer Holmberg
- Re: [rtcweb] Requesting "SDP or not SDP" debate t… Peter Thatcher
- Re: [rtcweb] Requesting "SDP or not SDP" debate t… Robin Raymond
- Re: [rtcweb] Requesting "SDP or not SDP" debate t… Martin Thomson
- Re: [rtcweb] Requesting "SDP or not SDP" debate t… Iñaki Baz Castillo
- Re: [rtcweb] Requesting "SDP or not SDP" debate t… Christer Holmberg
- [rtcweb] Priorities - Was: Requesting "SDP or not… Hutton, Andrew
- Re: [rtcweb] Requesting "SDP or not SDP" debate t… Harald Alvestrand
- Re: [rtcweb] Priorities - Was: Requesting "SDP or… Roman Shpount
- Re: [rtcweb] Priorities - Was: Requesting "SDP or… Matthew Kaufman (SKYPE)
- Re: [rtcweb] Requesting "SDP or not SDP" debate t… Iñaki Baz Castillo
- Re: [rtcweb] Priorities - Was: Requesting "SDP or… Hutton, Andrew
- Re: [rtcweb] Priorities - Was: Requesting "SDP or… Iñaki Baz Castillo
- Re: [rtcweb] Priorities - Was: Requesting "SDP or… Peter Thatcher
- Re: [rtcweb] Priorities - Was: Requesting "SDP or… Hutton, Andrew
- Re: [rtcweb] Requesting "SDP or not SDP" debate t… Harald Alvestrand
- Re: [rtcweb] Priorities - Was: Requesting "SDP or… Bernard Aboba
- Re: [rtcweb] Requesting "SDP or not SDP" debate t… Peter Thatcher
- Re: [rtcweb] Requesting "SDP or not SDP" debate t… Matthew Kaufman
- Re: [rtcweb] Priorities - Was: Requesting "SDP or… Bernard Aboba
- Re: [rtcweb] Priorities - Was: Requesting "SDP or… Richard Barnes
- Re: [rtcweb] Priorities - Was: Requesting "SDP or… Robin Raymond
- Re: [rtcweb] Requesting "SDP or not SDP" debate t… Peter Thatcher
- Re: [rtcweb] Requesting "SDP or not SDP" debate t… Matthew Kaufman
- Re: [rtcweb] Requesting "SDP or not SDP" debate t… Peter Thatcher
- Re: [rtcweb] Priorities - Was: Requesting "SDP or… Hutton, Andrew
- Re: [rtcweb] Priorities - Was: Requesting "SDP or… Parthasarathi R
- Re: [rtcweb] Requesting "SDP or not SDP" debate t… Iñaki Baz Castillo
- Re: [rtcweb] Requesting "SDP or not SDP" debate t… Emil Ivov
- Re: [rtcweb] Requesting "SDP or not SDP" debate t… Iñaki Baz Castillo
- Re: [rtcweb] Requesting "SDP or not SDP" debate t… Bossiel thioriguel
- Re: [rtcweb] Requesting "SDP or not SDP" debate t… Bossiel thioriguel
- Re: [rtcweb] Requesting "SDP or not SDP" debate t… Iñaki Baz Castillo
- Re: [rtcweb] Requesting "SDP or not SDP" debate t… Hutton, Andrew
- Re: [rtcweb] Requesting "SDP or not SDP" debate t… Hutton, Andrew
- Re: [rtcweb] Requesting "SDP or not SDP" debate t… Robin Raymond
- Re: [rtcweb] Requesting "SDP or not SDP" debate t… Robin Raymond
- Re: [rtcweb] Requesting "SDP or not SDP" debate t… Iñaki Baz Castillo
- Re: [rtcweb] Requesting "SDP or not SDP" debate t… Peter Thatcher
- Re: [rtcweb] Requesting "SDP or not SDP" debate t… Bossiel thioriguel
- Re: [rtcweb] Requesting "SDP or not SDP" debate t… Bossiel thioriguel
- Re: [rtcweb] Requesting "SDP or not SDP" debate t… Iñaki Baz Castillo
- Re: [rtcweb] Requesting "SDP or not SDP" debate t… Roman Shpount
- Re: [rtcweb] Requesting "SDP or not SDP" debate t… Roman Shpount
- Re: [rtcweb] Requesting "SDP or not SDP" debate t… Hutton, Andrew
- Re: [rtcweb] Requesting "SDP or not SDP" debate t… Matthew Kaufman (SKYPE)
- Re: [rtcweb] Requesting "SDP or not SDP" debate t… Silvia Pfeiffer
- Re: [rtcweb] Requesting "SDP or not SDP" debate t… Bossiel thioriguel
- Re: [rtcweb] Requesting "SDP or not SDP" debate t… Silvia Pfeiffer
- Re: [rtcweb] Requesting "SDP or not SDP" debate t… Roman Shpount
- Re: [rtcweb] Requesting "SDP or not SDP" debate t… Roman Shpount
- Re: [rtcweb] Requesting "SDP or not SDP" debate t… Martin Thomson