Re: [rtcweb] Requesting "SDP or not SDP" debate to be re-opened

Iñaki Baz Castillo <ibc@aliax.net> Fri, 21 June 2013 10:19 UTC

Return-Path: <ibc@aliax.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 5FC9B11E817D for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 21 Jun 2013 03:19:26 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.661
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.661 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.017, BAYES_00=-2.599, FM_FORGED_GMAIL=0.622, MIME_8BIT_HEADER=0.3, 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 Z7d7ij0GR4qp for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 21 Jun 2013 03:19:25 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-qa0-x230.google.com (mail-qa0-x230.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400d:c00::230]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B7CDE11E8173 for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Fri, 21 Jun 2013 03:19:25 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-qa0-f48.google.com with SMTP id cm16so406779qab.7 for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Fri, 21 Jun 2013 03:19:25 -0700 (PDT)
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:x-gm-message-state; bh=MtLoh2viYD0ln4i65DhwIFhnGHvhn61tfUhUnNBFEXo=; b=Lzx4A+h1ks4VbMZhFyzAENOHYPVXV8VVFHRQkqfMoFcQEFiRvAuFU9QvRknf4bX+XM HF7t+eWJHqWi8MnIkA2NbnfGk8qpLKUBrMhYJ1ud7n491LUMMgFqeVqeH1bOWbYixuqZ vg8K5dyzbxopf+wuQsx2S7ZgASMfYNjhQr96doUmx/9s9BfMK7X7t4zhEVGnWUXPFJhQ pF20U1QLaYBkC/0jNLM/Zl9GvXXyayRFqIrTn2HVKAHcd2U4wsfl/LjUvDkEpQz+D5OC AvpokSLZrh2x0c9ro+L8xfbzjzP5t2msjo6nlL/8YfZ8rlIYuuGTusuzwvuCbn/DjThk E8eQ==
X-Received: by 10.49.24.52 with SMTP id r20mr13600675qef.54.1371809965230; Fri, 21 Jun 2013 03:19:25 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.49.67.65 with HTTP; Fri, 21 Jun 2013 03:19:05 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <1371807600.23131.YahooMailNeo@web171301.mail.ir2.yahoo.com>
References: <CALiegfkajJPxWZTzjYssP91VW+StStLpxoxGCkjOLKDMUWc0rA@mail.gmail.com> <CABkgnnWfV=5xBaRqAddqUURThs9J4T4+0HK4Ux07VA51r5oC3Q@mail.gmail.com> <CAJrXDUFNGKvWHw-yqeApEdTeuqMNPTDxvdKZ2DuzANmcR2y2CQ@mail.gmail.com> <7594FB04B1934943A5C02806D1A2204B1C3AE500@ESESSMB209.ericsson.se> <CAJrXDUHCkQSLab2UuY_vWP3Gr8uh+++c9mDq5f4sCpuaK5aeLQ@mail.gmail.com> <51C1B907.8060508@hookflash.com> <CAJrXDUG06jvPvhfNwZ6Puzxj7E4XxELG_fU=S7B_c=tnC9eoNQ@mail.gmail.com> <78192824-A516-4376-8D4F-3B052ED47A0C@matthew.at> <CAJrXDUGOYc_Z_qWD7J0ZzVdfwYOacH_p5PjZEg5aP1LUetffMA@mail.gmail.com> <51C1F2E9.20405@hookflash.com> <51C1F5ED.9090308@matthew.at> <51C20FAA.4050701@hookflash.com> <CABkgnnWw9anT+h_hnF14nBChS73qpTb31hSM=p2KnGrcRPGRJA@mail.gmail.com> <51C3209B.1030501@alvestrand.no> <CALiegfkEpwxNZL8TU0ofCzRB_Gza+NoSnZpGcM=tuYBOXmHsZQ@mail.gmail.com> <51C335F9.4000900@alvestrand.no> <CALiegfk_wwvdSixFYWpBBdUNfXxmcOwCnRsjyS6J3M9WG_dJCg@mail.gmail.com> <51C38356.3020402@jitsi.org> <CALiegfm1xYpAnmrg=4vx_06RZQTo_RS2nFJoidpoQtjg2kn=Vw@mail.gmail.com> <1371807600.23131.YahooMailNeo@web171301.mail.ir2.yahoo.com>
From: =?UTF-8?Q?I=C3=B1aki_Baz_Castillo?= <ibc@aliax.net>
Date: Fri, 21 Jun 2013 12:19:05 +0200
Message-ID: <CALiegfmPV=E2qh_E-v_eBiSj9iK7Un2JLDtELF7xnYARHy5B3g@mail.gmail.com>
To: Bossiel thioriguel <bossiel@yahoo.fr>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQn5py/R3IQTq6PqnxpoMG0er+5jzSpHSfXlKerMR8IO+MFeLB9OkNysz/z4JLMU1JkL+Vy/
Cc: "diopmamadou@doubango.org" <diopmamadou@doubango.org>, "rtcweb@ietf.org" <rtcweb@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [rtcweb] Requesting "SDP or not SDP" debate to be re-opened
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: Fri, 21 Jun 2013 10:19:26 -0000

2013/6/21 Bossiel thioriguel <bossiel@yahoo.fr>;:
> Using the current WebRTC we have managed to *easily* build almost all kind
> of applications: click-to-call, SIP/IMS clients, gateways to PSTN, MCUs,
> Telemedicine systems...and haven't seen any major issue. It's true that it's
> not natural to "hack" a blob SDP to implement features like hold/resume,
> media update, early media ... but it works and there are demo applications
> showing it.

Hi Bossiel,

Current WebRTC is based on SDP mainly for "SIP interoperability", so
obviously it is "easy" to build like-SIP-based applications. Anyhow in
most of the apps you mean I'm pretty sure that there are just a few
SDP exchanges, probably just the initial SDP offer/answer and some
other for "hold" / "unhold" purposes (which requires SDP mangling).

Now let's assume that WebRTC is much more than
SIP-business-into-the-web, let's assume that WebRTC is RTC for the Web
rather than Web for RTC.



> For the current WebRTC, Google open sourced their engine, produced drafts, a working implementation in chrome, a mailing-list to help developers, demo applications, documentation... we just want to see the same from any company asking to rewrite everything.

A company? AFAIK this is a IETF WG, not a company. I am not speaking
on behalf of any company or business.


Is there anyone not involved in SIP/PSTN business which feels
comfortable with the SDP-based specs of WebRTC?


Best regards.



--
Iñaki Baz Castillo
<ibc@aliax.net>;