Re: [rtcweb] WG Action: Rechartered Real-Time Communication in WEB-browsers (rtcweb)

[Sean Turner <[e-mail]>]

I will upload the slides to the datatracker. Thanks for getting these done early!

spt

> On Mar 8, 2021, at 14:30, Justin Uberti <[e-mail]> wrote:
> 
> The slides have been reworked based on feedback that was provided. Here's the latest version that I plan to present on Friday.
> 
> On Wed, Feb 24, 2021 at 1:44 PM Justin Uberti <[e-mail]> wrote:
> Here's an initial set of slides that I put together the other day, still a few ??? to address: https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/1aprC-TwmLI_zGdWgnTdKVYvaqXNkcf9eMgMhAIzv8Ek/edit?usp=sharing&resourcekey=0-8HY7ugai8XnQyH4sA8cQdA. Please have a look and feel free to leave comments in the preso.
> 
> On Sat, Feb 20, 2021 at 1:53 PM Christer Holmberg <christer.holmberg=[e-mail]> wrote:
> Hi Roman,
> 
>  
> 
> >You are probably the most qualified to do so. Let me know if you need any help regarding the current implementation status or backward interop testing.
> 
>  
> 
> I don’t have much information, so feel free to send me whatever you have :)
> 
>  
> 
> Regards,
> 
>  
> 
> Christer
> 
> 
> 
>  
> 
>  
> 
> On Sat, Feb 20, 2021 at 1:25 PM Christer Holmberg <christer.holmberg=[e-mail]> wrote:
> 
> Hi,
> 
>  
> 
> I could present the JSEP/BUNDLE specification misalignment, unless someone else wants to.
> 
>  
> 
> Regards,
> 
>  
> 
> Christer
> 
>  
> 
> From: rtcweb <[e-mail]> On Behalf Of Ted Hardie
> Sent: perjantai 19. helmikuuta 2021 20.11
> To: RTCWeb IETF <[e-mail]>
> Cc: [e-mail]
> Subject: Re: [rtcweb] WG Action: Rechartered Real-Time Communication in WEB-browsers (rtcweb)
> 
>  
> 
> And we're back.
> 
>  
> 
> This is hopefully for a limited engagement, as the charter is quite pointed on what we have to do. 
> 
>  
> 
> We do have a meeting slot at IETF 110, Friday March 12, 12:00 UTC (the first slot on the final day, in other words). The bulk of the time will be spent on the handling of "m=" sections that are designated as bundle-only.  If you want to present on this, please send a note to the WG as soon as possible.  If you have some other agenda item, please let Sean and me know, and we'll discuss it with you.
> 
>  
> 
> thanks,
> 
>  
> 
> Ted and Sean
> 
>  
> 
>  
> 
> On Fri, Feb 19, 2021 at 9:42 AM The IESG <[e-mail]> wrote:
> 
> The Real-Time Communication in WEB-browsers (rtcweb) WG in the Applications
> and Real-Time Area of the IETF has been rechartered. For additional
> information, please contact the Area Directors or the WG Chairs.
> 
> Real-Time Communication in WEB-browsers (rtcweb)
> -----------------------------------------------------------------------
> Current status: Proposed WG
> 
> Chairs:
>   Sean Turner <[e-mail]>
>   Ted Hardie <[e-mail]>
> 
> Assigned Area Director:
>   Murray Kucherawy <[e-mail]>
> 
> Applications and Real-Time Area Directors:
>   Barry Leiba <[e-mail]>
>   Murray Kucherawy <[e-mail]>
> 
> Mailing list:
>   Address: [e-mail]
>   To subscribe: https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rtcweb
>   Archive: https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/rtcweb/
> 
> Group page: https://datatracker.ietf.org/group/rtcweb/
> 
> Charter: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/charter-ietf-rtcweb/
> 
> The RTCWEB working group was originally chartered to standardize mechanisms
> that provide direct interactive rich communication using audio, video,
> collaboration, games, etc. between two peers' web-browsers, without requiring
> non-standard extensions or proprietary plug-ins.  The result was a set of
> RFCs from RTCWEB, in addition to many other RFCs from other working groups,
> all of which are interrelated and had to be published together in what the
> RFC Editor refers to as a “cluster”.  In the end, that cluster comprised more
> than 40 RFCs and was finally published in January 2021.
> 
> During the run-up to publication of the cluster, a contradiction was
> identified between what became RFCs 8829 and 8843.  A description of this
> contradiction was added to both documents to highlight the problem, and state
> our intention to proceed with publication but quickly initiate an effort to
> publish updates to the affected documents.
> 
> The key part of the added text was as follows:
> 
> “The specific issue involves the handling of "m=" sections that are
> designated as bundle-only, as discussed in Section 4.1.1 of [RFC 8829]. 
> Currently, there is divergence between JSEP and BUNDLE, as well as between
> these specifications and existing browser implementations …”
> 
> The working group is being reconstituted to take up this contradiction, come
> to consensus on a resolution, and issue Standards Track updates for those two
> documents.  Specifically, the goal of this work is to address only the
> contradictions regarding "bundle-only" between BUNDLE and JSEP.  The
> resulting aligned solution should avoid impacting the interoperability with
> SDP Offer/Answer.  Finally, the impact on existing implementations that are
> affected by any change is to be considered.
> 
> draft-ietf-rtcweb-sdp, which has not yet been published, will be returned to
> the working group to be updated according to the resolution of the issue
> described above.  The working group will therefore produce updates to the
> JSEP and BUNDLE documents, and re-submit draft-ietf-rtcweb-sdp for
> publication after it has been revised.  Updating any other document, or
> taking up any other issue, is out of scope and will require IESG approval via
> rechartering.
> 
> Coordination with the MMUSIC working group to develop this solution will be
> required.
> 
> Milestones:
> 
>   Aug 2021 - Update to draft-ietf-rtcweb-sdp to the IESG as Informational.
> 
>   Aug 2021 - Updates to the JSEP and BUNDLE documents to the IESG as Proposed
>   Standard.
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> rtcweb mailing list
> [e-mail]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rtcweb
> 
> _______________________________________________
> rtcweb mailing list
> [e-mail]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rtcweb
> <Aligning JSEP + BUNDLE [public].pdf>