Re: [rtcweb] Proposal for a JS API for NoPlan (adding multiple sources without encoding them in SDP)

Silvia Pfeiffer <silviapfeiffer1@gmail.com> Wed, 19 June 2013 12:37 UTC

Return-Path: <silviapfeiffer1@gmail.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 0780C21F9374 for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 19 Jun 2013 05:37:55 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.6
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.6 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.000, BAYES_00=-2.599, NO_RELAYS=-0.001]
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 x8IOMygkRnkp for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 19 Jun 2013 05:37:54 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-ob0-x22a.google.com (mail-ob0-x22a.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4003:c01::22a]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0015621F9C02 for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Wed, 19 Jun 2013 05:37:33 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-ob0-f170.google.com with SMTP id ef5so5991986obb.29 for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Wed, 19 Jun 2013 05:37:26 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc:content-type; bh=OjkqjfksbweqgMLfkH7nwaPbMdQFccqKijlorpgAyu0=; b=SNlLa2u4/tlGaybzteS5o/tvjZNWUpiK/MB1KFyCp8Xku/D4DmN/3x96ePJhJHm17a 9PSqHowCp3+ZJb4DMSWSXn01M9k16PVwSfC+PEadIQWhZm/9S71JbQB9BDryWSZww7z+ 18EBATqEzXIwSA5ByFZv2XF3JvfdYXxAcSmuyAawvCLHXpMvx1NWMmJ4Mz0gr5MkLSPx K0rRo9FuhJgc9kJ9PnKz+x3UsRvHIADxNt+ABWJQABqrrAJK5xlOuHblJA50PecoJNf0 06ygp06gJwnFyNSJu05rIzv0qqqbAy5NAl8FoY31M49mT3GZ3UIYGZTaz+/IdEDKXteg Qv7g==
X-Received: by 10.60.162.98 with SMTP id xz2mr1913192oeb.7.1371645446643; Wed, 19 Jun 2013 05:37:26 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.76.116.71 with HTTP; Wed, 19 Jun 2013 05:37:06 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <51C1A50D.2010703@alvestrand.no>
References: <CAJrXDUHdoxLTsofiwLBdwBNnCCkCBgjSdbmLaXrNEPODMrsSVA@mail.gmail.com> <CAHp8n2m4VwkpbdGE+q73qqij5RDCB4Vb-Ui1LmGSx1zmv8TX2g@mail.gmail.com> <51BFFB65.2020203@jitsi.org> <CAHp8n2mD55CL5sVcSyvqNz_nzqtrwcfEXy_dU23wXGcV0PhR8A@mail.gmail.com> <51C051AB.6030505@makk.es> <CAHp8n2kHS2KKF4tNiYhq6xMPjfSvqojVMhsmUSoz=yS1ZNBymw@mail.gmail.com> <51C1A50D.2010703@alvestrand.no>
From: Silvia Pfeiffer <silviapfeiffer1@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 19 Jun 2013 22:37:06 +1000
Message-ID: <CAHp8n2kpRp_iz88xYQZE_-vsVHOybH8O1AkFkkXFctXqQiw28Q@mail.gmail.com>
To: Harald Alvestrand <harald@alvestrand.no>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Cc: rtcweb@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [rtcweb] Proposal for a JS API for NoPlan (adding multiple sources without encoding them in SDP)
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: Wed, 19 Jun 2013 12:37:55 -0000

On Wed, Jun 19, 2013 at 10:33 PM, Harald Alvestrand
<harald@alvestrand.no>; wrote:
> On 06/19/2013 04:35 AM, Silvia Pfeiffer wrote:
>>
>> On Tue, Jun 18, 2013 at 10:25 PM, Max Jonas Werner <mail@makk.es>; wrote:
>>>
>>> Hej Silvia,
>>>
>>> On 18.06.2013 08:25, Silvia Pfeiffer wrote:> On Tue, Jun 18, 2013 at
>>> 4:17 PM, Emil Ivov <emcho@jitsi.org>; wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> On 18.06.13, 03:00, Silvia Pfeiffer wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> What I would like to see, though, is a bit different from what you've
>>>>>> proposed. In particular, the MediaFlowDescription object is the one
>>>>>> object that I believe is supposed to enable JS developers to  do "SDP
>>>>>> hacking" without having to understand SDP. Unfortunately, the way in
>>>>>> which it is currently written, this API doesn't help a JS developer
>>>>>> much. There are properties in that object like "ssrc" that mean
>>>>>> nothing unless you understand SDP.
>>>>>
>>>>> SSRC is really just a flow identifier and it actually comes from RTP,
>>>>> not
>>>>> SDP.
>>>>
>>>> OK, could we call it rtpflowId or mediaflowId or peerflowId or
>>>> something? And what exactly are the other identifiers?
>>>> (You will notice that I am really naive wrt SDP, sorry!)
>>>
>>> Do you really want to create a second "terminology world"? For people
>>> who don't know what SSRC means (because they don't know RTP) it may seem
>>> reasonable but to those who already know RTP you'd have to explain
>>> "yeah, rtpflowId is actually SSRC." So the term SSRC would have to be
>>> included in the spec anyway.
>>
>> You can leave mention of SSRC to a comment in the spec next to rtpflowId.
>>
>>> I'm not sure if having different names for the same thing would lead to
>>> less confusion.
>>
>> If SSRC is the name it's given in SDP and we want to get away from
>> SDP, this would be a first step, wouldn't it?
>
>
> SSRC is the name it's given in RTP, and we have (so far) had consensus on
> using RTP.

Ah ok, I thought it was a SDP parameter.
S.