Re: [rtcweb] RTCWeb default signaling protocol [was RE: About defining a signaling protocol for WebRTC (or not)]

[Bernard Aboba <[e-mail]>]

[BA]  I think this is the main point.   If we finish RTCWEB 1.0 expeditiously, this will in all likelihood
spawn a number of browser-independent signaling libraries, as well as developing a wealth of experience
with the limitations of RFCWEB 1.0, to inform future efforts. 

The alternative is to "load up the camel" until it collapses under the weight of (largely irrelevant) use
cases.  Since the realtime web has been around for over a decade, we have a pretty good idea of what
native realtime capabilities would be used for -- and PSTN connectivity has never been high on the list.


> Yes, this is critical.  We need to finish it.  I'd rather have it 
> finished and a strong project to build a "standard" external JS library 
> under way than to have the whole thing wait.  But if I had my druthers 
> (what the bleep are those, anyways?) I'd have an optional signaling 
> protocol available.