Re: [rtcweb] I-D Action: draft-ietf-rtcweb-data-channel-04.txt

Randell Jesup <randell-ietf@jesup.org> Tue, 05 March 2013 10:18 UTC

Return-Path: <randell-ietf@jesup.org>
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 D855F21F88E5 for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 5 Mar 2013 02:18:36 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.599
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599]
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 b-CC4x+ULHfz for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 5 Mar 2013 02:18:36 -0800 (PST)
Received: from r2-chicago.webserversystems.com (r2-chicago.webserversystems.com [173.236.101.58]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6573021F88E3 for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Tue, 5 Mar 2013 02:18:36 -0800 (PST)
Received: from pool-98-111-140-34.phlapa.fios.verizon.net ([98.111.140.34]:3485 helo=[192.168.1.12]) by r2-chicago.webserversystems.com with esmtpsa (TLSv1:DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA:256) (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from <randell-ietf@jesup.org>) id 1UCox9-00097e-HS for rtcweb@ietf.org; Tue, 05 Mar 2013 04:18:35 -0600
Message-ID: <5135C64A.50302@jesup.org>
Date: Tue, 05 Mar 2013 05:17:46 -0500
From: Randell Jesup <randell-ietf@jesup.org>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 5.1; rv:17.0) Gecko/20130215 Thunderbird/17.0.3
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: rtcweb@ietf.org
References: <20130225224014.18570.20111.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> <39821B4C400EC14DAD4DB25330A9271A0191D3@FR711WXCHMBA03.zeu.alcatel-lucent.com>
In-Reply-To: <39821B4C400EC14DAD4DB25330A9271A0191D3@FR711WXCHMBA03.zeu.alcatel-lucent.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-AntiAbuse: This header was added to track abuse, please include it with any abuse report
X-AntiAbuse: Primary Hostname - r2-chicago.webserversystems.com
X-AntiAbuse: Original Domain - ietf.org
X-AntiAbuse: Originator/Caller UID/GID - [47 12] / [47 12]
X-AntiAbuse: Sender Address Domain - jesup.org
Subject: Re: [rtcweb] I-D Action: draft-ietf-rtcweb-data-channel-04.txt
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, 05 Mar 2013 10:18:37 -0000

On 3/4/2013 9:36 AM, MARCON, JEROME (JEROME) wrote:
> Randell,
>
> Thanks for this update. There are some points not (yet) explained in the text:
>
> 1. Following the SDP opening handshake, are the data channels implicitly opened, or does the offerer send one DATA_CHANNEL_OPEN message per new data channel ?

One Open per new channel which can be followed immediately with data.  
If the application has some out-of-band way to know about the channels 
expected (see the text), it could indicate so (effectively allowing 
application-mediated negotiation with no Open messages in-band - not 
that I generally would suggest this for normal uses).

> 2. "channel is available to send as soon as the DATA_CHANNEL_OPEN has been sent". And the SACK received I guess ?

No SACK required I believe.  As far as SCTP is concerned, Open messages 
are just data on the stream.

> 3. Assuming an endpoint creating a new offer (e.g. to reflect a change in media streams) while an SCTP association is already established. In this case, what does the SCTP association m-line contain: the unchanged list of data channels contained in the initial offer (which created the SCTP association), or the list of data channels currently opened, or .. ?

Just the listing for the association that was in the original offer 
(though this would be the SCTP SDP MMUSIC draft's issue).

> 4. What happens if the SDP Opening Handshake agreed on some data channels using the 'chat' subprotocol, and later on an endpoint creates in-band a new channel with 'file transfer' subprotocol ?

When you create a channel, it sends Open on an unused Stream.



-- 
Randell Jesup
randell-ietf@jesup.org