Re: [rtcweb] Bridged line appearance? (Re: Usecase & architecture: Browser application with separate webserver & voipserver)

Matthew Kaufman <matthew.kaufman@skype.net> Wed, 07 September 2011 22:02 UTC

Return-Path: <matthew.kaufman@skype.net>
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 1AABD21F8DAA for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 7 Sep 2011 15:02:26 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -5.296
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.296 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=1.303, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4]
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 XwAF6lYXhoXU for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 7 Sep 2011 15:02:25 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mx.skype.net (mx.skype.net [78.141.177.88]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5E14821F8DA5 for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Wed, 7 Sep 2011 15:02:25 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mx.skype.net (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mx.skype.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7F4287FD; Thu, 8 Sep 2011 00:04:14 +0200 (CEST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed; d=skype.net; h=message-id :date:from:mime-version:to:cc:subject:references:in-reply-to :content-type:content-transfer-encoding; s=mx; bh=2ZdGBTjZB/rv8d rwVxQM/v7Uzag=; b=ulY6EBeLAX5eCIHzIBeqoTZ056pLAEnj3VIB4JkZuiRP1r sR8w6qLYZyK1Gow3Z+qNaufXdRTOoZLjrhndUyPLJfFQhOVOSP6rfBXOvqsqzy5z Ai1cPpVXGFas1ttj7FGcXdGXldKMZ/Iey/YVsE9Z8/H3ualJQmSijAXJgb8ms=
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=skype.net; h=message-id:date:from :mime-version:to:cc:subject:references:in-reply-to:content-type: content-transfer-encoding; q=dns; s=mx; b=bjYLG4kN1nZWV/ZuMQENPR GDmqCPdh/KmmPGn6BtVpa9+DaDdcR8oVsPnbTuvIcjwqrORyU+po0+UZtATPElNN HvdM6etLOu2Ho9pThMvmftxHLqfFELj3mfC5LVwcIxfjvD+9MY7NuPSNAH1slCzz kfZ+ImNGEADHgX644x3GU=
Received: from zimbra.skype.net (zimbra.skype.net [78.141.177.82]) by mx.skype.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7D8067F6; Thu, 8 Sep 2011 00:04:14 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by zimbra.skype.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5E3C835081CC; Thu, 8 Sep 2011 00:04:14 +0200 (CEST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at lu2-zimbra.skype.net
Received: from zimbra.skype.net ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (zimbra.skype.net [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id tsc+uT4ypcNR; Thu, 8 Sep 2011 00:04:13 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from Matthew-Kaufman-Air.local (50-0-2-20.static.sonic.net [50.0.2.20]) by zimbra.skype.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 04D0A35081D8; Thu, 8 Sep 2011 00:04:12 +0200 (CEST)
Message-ID: <4E67EA5B.605@skype.net>
Date: Wed, 07 Sep 2011 15:04:11 -0700
From: Matthew Kaufman <matthew.kaufman@skype.net>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.6; rv:6.0.2) Gecko/20110902 Thunderbird/6.0.2
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Cullen Jennings <fluffy@cisco.com>
References: <CAM_kxqci51=BnUFe-67Qs4eCxtGY50HDsRPrLjYULnBZJoH0Ow@mail.gmail.com>, <2E239D6FCD033C4BAF15F386A979BF5106436F@sonusinmail02.sonusnet.com> <BLU152-W72696F07F16816B1B267593100@phx.gbl> <2E239D6FCD033C4BAF15F386A979BF51064707@sonusinmail02.sonusnet.com> <4E659576.1000301@skype.net> <2E239D6FCD033C4BAF15F386A979BF510F0868@sonusinmail02.sonusnet.com> <4E666785.7040409@skype.net> <4E67513C.3030600@alvestrand.no> <4E677CB8.40203@skype.net> <5DD808C2-D4ED-45E4-8D18-02613281A62D@cisco.com>
In-Reply-To: <5DD808C2-D4ED-45E4-8D18-02613281A62D@cisco.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Cc: rtcweb@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [rtcweb] Bridged line appearance? (Re: Usecase & architecture: Browser application with separate webserver & voipserver)
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, 07 Sep 2011 22:02:26 -0000

On 9/7/11 7:59 AM, Cullen Jennings wrote:
>
> Give me one reasons why it would be any harder to do if the browser did SIP than if it did the type of API you are talking about. I think you are just wrong here. The web app in the JS and in the web server would still just use SIP to set up media the way it wanted - just like you would do with the other API. No one is proposing we use the BLISS shared line appearance or anything like that - we are proposing that when A wants to say what codecs to use for sending media to B, use that part of SIP.

The problem with using "that part of SIP" is that you're at the top of a 
very very slippery slope. You want "just SIP"? With early media? PRACK? 
Refer? ...?

And then what happens when people try to write applications that have a 
real SIP server at the far end that doesn't know what to do with 
something that supports "just SIP" without any of its 
essentially-mandatory extensions?

Matthew Kaufman