Re: [rtcweb] Another consideration about signaling

Saúl Ibarra Corretgé <saul@ag-projects.com> Tue, 11 October 2011 09:24 UTC

Return-Path: <saul@ag-projects.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 8283F21F8CB7 for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 11 Oct 2011 02:24:16 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.688
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.688 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, HELO_MISMATCH_NET=0.611, 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 yU72ra7wB60b for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 11 Oct 2011 02:24:16 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail.sipthor.net (node06.dns-hosting.info [85.17.186.6]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D8EF721F8CA5 for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Tue, 11 Oct 2011 02:24:15 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail.sipthor.net (Postfix, from userid 5001) id 24808B01A5; Tue, 11 Oct 2011 11:23:21 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from [192.168.99.36] (ip3e830637.speed.planet.nl [62.131.6.55]) by mail.sipthor.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 45B51B019E; Tue, 11 Oct 2011 11:23:09 +0200 (CEST)
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1084)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
From: =?iso-8859-1?Q?Sa=FAl_Ibarra_Corretg=E9?= <saul@ag-projects.com>
In-Reply-To: <CALiegf=d=iCULNG9X_EV0q_D38c9ZqqGRJ8p12L=AYexsw7F9Q@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 11 Oct 2011 11:23:08 +0200
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <B530ABBB-0BEC-48BD-8531-BB5A52D67209@ag-projects.com>
References: <CALiegfmoPWfhtBRiOfgLHG1uhJK_kK2t11xMoop-fT6qW4DUJQ@mail.gmail.com> <4E8F57EB.8030504@digium.com> <CABw3bnOD5APidfbqNscXdPURyY-AMQZqoyYPm6v2xWo5VWKOLA@mail.gmail.com> <4E905B7F.7010505@digium.com> <CABw3bnN2O6zgREBoWEdW2jj6-A4df05KJ_Y49LT3tsUXaXewwA@mail.gmail.com> <4E930845.60809@digium.com> <CALiegfnvBADCrGuWUB57=VQ+RWyN83JbZkp7a27UvoZ+XBwVMA@mail.gmail.com> <4E932179.7080000@digium.com> <CALiegf=O_b2Z4QwF61S+tvb9e8un+y9apVjoErZRWT_joC4RsA@mail.gmail.com> <CA+9kkMCv_hgeCwYUpRWubYO-W3zrn8+_-x_vbECcBdME7xYBkg@mail.gmail.com> <CALiegfkXNZpGiJNaksC6GsmgK7FLCnPZtBU2_Yq8MU=0wDN+gQ@mail.gmail.com> <CA+9kkMAF9K+ma6W4iCyY+4NWOnWaWSUr7HEaLn1ug0FR-GJ-NQ@mail.gmail.com> <CALiegf=d=iCULNG9X_EV0q_D38c9ZqqGRJ8p12L=AYexsw7F9Q@mail.gmail.com>
To: =?iso-8859-1?Q?I=F1aki_Baz_Castillo?= <ibc@aliax.net>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1084)
Cc: rtcweb@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [rtcweb] Another consideration about signaling
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 09:24:16 -0000

On Oct 11, 2011, at 9:41 AM, Iñaki Baz Castillo wrote:

> 2011/10/10 Ted Hardie <ted.ietf@gmail.com>om>:
>> If you believe that each RTCWeb Javascript/server pair needs to implement an
>> SDP-based offer/answer protocol, but that it may choose among different
>> syntaxes for carrying the SDP, then I think you're a lot closer to what I
>> would call "having standard signaling" than not.
> 
> Hi Ted, alice from her browser can only establish a media session with
> bob if both visit the same website so they already share the same JS
> code dictaminating the signaling protocol to use (which can be SIP, or
> XMPP or some custom JSON based protocol).
> 
> I just said that, regardless the chosen signaling protocol, such
> protocol would require some way to send and receive a SDP (or
> something that looks an SDP), so the JS API for dealing with media in
> a RTCweb capable browser will deal, at the end, with SDP's. IMHO
> that's obvious.
> 

Sure, reinventing SDP would not be nice. What would be nice is to have some sort of RTCWeb API to manage something that corresponds to an SDP. Then it would be up to the signaling protocol implementors to convert to and from this entities to their real SDP representation, that is, plaintext for SIP and XML for XMPP, for example.

--
Saúl Ibarra Corretgé
AG Projects