Re: [rtcweb] Decision confirmations needed

Ted Hardie <> Mon, 29 March 2021 12:45 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4E3E13A10A0 for <>; Mon, 29 Mar 2021 05:45:14 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.098
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.098 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key)
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id UhVK00EE85rB for <>; Mon, 29 Mar 2021 05:45:11 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::22a]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A0DF03A109F for <>; Mon, 29 Mar 2021 05:45:11 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by with SMTP id c16so12960460oib.3 for <>; Mon, 29 Mar 2021 05:45:11 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to; bh=AP5Xv6bwLPR/69Y6habqEMqYpK7ZYeDiHeCxJZ+LMLI=; b=NDqMJPHk5uXaipMbB8a/pDlKoEyxZU1mdXH60ExYOzjdkLa2eItGIcTMdA8fy0PxYE iw50/O+uqvY4nkj2cVDPqrQ1BM0t0E0YpLmmX3p0uFpc6SOjSfqMYZOLKEXt+EmcqU7F bCq1pheiwuH7iir8Xp67H8cH1FS2lJi11AvLdQumkcmdm7N7WFmNndUDKx/O17z8TFLb z+buoCULZvmIt3OiXfmuF3Lz50U7r2c7iRZLqX3zL/vaTCdB7vWHiuYJrD67CeB4HgHp O6VCIsDHdh5iVBpcqalQbBkykXbnDCw5QHf2yGD4kWo/Wy4AO4xXHsY2A+VxFNGk0ug5 yKQA==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to; bh=AP5Xv6bwLPR/69Y6habqEMqYpK7ZYeDiHeCxJZ+LMLI=; b=P/8BEMrTu+3t98mXRhd6pcaXjZWJgIcjq06CyaPjo8K3gyz6/y8cx4ul658a9sL1HL OugoUutc3To1kl4kt/V0fGYFX/vCyLaguhkt19sp/6Qhq8f1ri7FwrW2sp5rJNmijTmw dqPtpnkca9e8/lQPWZ9hpbM/8rt89qZjohnxTAVgMOga34eOsdFGFNjB06Lh0yupbweZ NQZSZUtYvm7/eIqSgpnPzeht0xXF7GWraK6oova3wuZzkXUe0Jcaq2BpymWuOMAVFWO4 3rXefnN8YI0+6I4msdYmEDBUYtcuIlTgEYs4RST3bkzntWaKIiL61MOs6YkSmtHQBTFk v0pQ==
X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM532AruoGT8kaaAGi+PUYxt+X49JcytqWjtCamZqCcihL6UI9Iuwe z0N54dHn0Y9B/FZ584SxOEkPSn26cAhUG6zGC/LxA6iooJ4=
X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJxrzmmIkEuF2d4YVlcQMgu1o+Q8buOo/2rhXOIxTkz/4xA2n1ocnoV6Re6raeGH8Sow74sSGHoEs5ac6F243s4=
X-Received: by 2002:aca:c4cb:: with SMTP id u194mr18975274oif.74.1617021909714; Mon, 29 Mar 2021 05:45:09 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <>
In-Reply-To: <>
From: Ted Hardie <>
Date: Mon, 29 Mar 2021 12:44:43 +0000
Message-ID: <>
To: RTCWeb IETF <>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="00000000000085ccac05beac408f"
Archived-At: <>
Subject: Re: [rtcweb] Decision confirmations needed
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: Real-Time Communication in WEB-browsers working group list <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 29 Mar 2021 12:45:14 -0000


It has been a week since I sent this to the list and there have been no
objections and some additional support since then.  Mindful, though, that I
did not set a deadline, I'd ask that anyone with any concerns to please
raise them by April 1, 2021 18:00 UTC.


Ted Hardie

On Mon, Mar 22, 2021 at 9:10 AM Ted Hardie <> wrote:

> At the recent meeting there were several decisions which need confirmation.
> First, the resolution of the core question of the mismatch between BUNDLE
> and JSEP was:
> * Switch BUNDLE to match JSEP [Christer volunteered to do it].
> If you object to this result, please send a message to the list explaining
> why and what you would like to see instead.
> For the mechanism to accomplish that, the group in the meeting agreed to:
> * Create a new "max-bundle-safe" [name TBD] with current
> "max-bundle-behavior". Document that "max-bundle" used to exist and now has
> unspecified and deprecated behavior.
> If you object to this result, please send a message to the list explaining
> why and what you would like to see instead. Note that if you object to the
> first point and your reason for the second objection is that you prefer
> something else there, you do not need to object again.
> On a functional basis the plan i  to re-rev JSEP in place rather than to
> do a patch draft.   If you object to that revision plan, please send a
> message to the list explaining why and what you would like to see instead.
> Christer will discuss the same thing for BUNDLE with the ADs and chairs;
> if you have an opinion on that, please send it to the ADs and chairs of
> both RTCWEB and MMUSIC.
> If you are okay with these results and did not voice your opinion at the
> meeting, please send your confirmation to the list.
> Thanks,
> Ted Hardie