[rtcweb] DTMF resolution proposal

Ted Hardie <ted.ietf@gmail.com> Mon, 07 March 2016 20:36 UTC

Return-Path: <ted.ietf@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: rtcweb@ietfc.amsl.com
Delivered-To: rtcweb@ietfc.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfc.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 69AAD1CDB39 for <rtcweb@ietfc.amsl.com>; Mon, 7 Mar 2016 12:36:12 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.699
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.699 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfc.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.41]) by localhost (ietfc.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id zcrZmOmLcbTp for <rtcweb@ietfc.amsl.com>; Mon, 7 Mar 2016 12:36:11 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-qk0-x22b.google.com (mail-qk0-x22b.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400d:c09::22b]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfc.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 0F4E21CDB37 for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Mon, 7 Mar 2016 12:36:11 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-qk0-x22b.google.com with SMTP id o6so51704388qkc.2 for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Mon, 07 Mar 2016 12:36:11 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:from:date:message-id:subject:to; bh=kVXNQg4EFoRu+Cdfqw5t2i2FNCnqUMUaDKlY3hqCWLU=; b=vWLzSPbAA/dHkeoYKgUgQgcZKG3/KLv83PBOft8Ata8ECajbr4qwlvFwR7oCn9/NI8 uVtZ/BEn6RyNSR88BONunKyNpOtSKZU4Adq2oMK069rWCTDQcSN7WWTUiSRhuI+8WWf9 g5h4lh1nb47Fp7Z21GC0Mx1GotD7rpgEY1PHafKtsGcqGeIqk+YY/wroRlbaT3d5wmNE +oeqOKm+E/nRdkIpEt0TLjvrXrFiwYX+L1P/fvJHgSlN/2tFACbMB/vCu4u8kGAjSW5C SGejjvH+E9y2LCIPIKDHxdccwnTgMSY9DcMri0ma0NOHIVmxO4/4IvB56lDw3rq9O+lh +Ehw==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:from:date:message-id:subject:to; bh=kVXNQg4EFoRu+Cdfqw5t2i2FNCnqUMUaDKlY3hqCWLU=; b=ZTkFQD3Giw1TzPyilVgAv+eAT199XhziC2HOCQnmT00PasaR+8noLOX+VkCBN/CCO6 4LN7SlBUOvz7QTkBTlbch3CyusfY8k0cHmaoiL4lHFs5VVCHk32KHu6d0JpRigQ7or6y fGWxyDFe350Rj/SmrigUgi1dE7HKxJd5DvLuGRvZLNQMyhbvCIsiH68scPT6MhR++eKO jF4wkfWUtiDJ2OuuBvRuAn+oNgDYFvYD5XXcPP5TRXfwA8GA8Pi191FHHrJN5hlHB6eM VgIUsDA3oE+F+WA6sreGWj3WKfNYbZTqzkH0AUlFk/MmmncSYZeZ3/alcTgGQOctPvtY x41w==
X-Gm-Message-State: AD7BkJJD5eNjdiIJLQhAP8tqijetEaTGj+SXonszKRGDOeoTLQx7UOgf2Am+C3e+cLlRhYtdRnHID0c0yrusBg==
X-Received: by 10.55.192.154 with SMTP id v26mr17580326qkv.36.1457382969997; Mon, 07 Mar 2016 12:36:09 -0800 (PST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.55.6.13 with HTTP; Mon, 7 Mar 2016 12:35:50 -0800 (PST)
From: Ted Hardie <ted.ietf@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 07 Mar 2016 12:35:50 -0800
Message-ID: <CA+9kkMANw8uPLObeGt68Rz+usObeDjQDYp-eQjp=WiCnWPByaQ@mail.gmail.com>
To: "rtcweb@ietf.org" <rtcweb@ietf.org>, Cullen Jennings <fluffy@cisco.com>, Sean Turner <sean@sn3rd.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="001a1147a3f03a9ecd052d7b6a8c"
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/rtcweb/Y48KKe7Yg06C1SZVUEPM3qLzYss>
Subject: [rtcweb] DTMF resolution proposal
X-BeenThere: rtcweb@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17
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: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/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: Mon, 07 Mar 2016 20:36:12 -0000

We've had about 60 or so messages on this topic, and the rough consensus
seems to be align this document with the limits set out in the W3C work
here:

https://www.w3.org/TR/webrtc/#rtcdtmfsender

However, there was also a proposal to slightly modify those limits.  They
are currently:

"The duration cannot be more than 6000 ms or less than 40 ms. The default
duration is 100 ms for each tone."

Based on Roman's note, a minimum of 40ms and a maximum 8000 ms to align
with the ITU and RFC2833.

To resolve this, I propose that we ask the WebRTC group to raise their max
to 8000 and, on receiving a positive response, publish this document with
40/8000 as the min and max.  If they give a negative response, we retain
40/6000.  This values alignment between the two documents higher than the
reference 2833, but that seems sensible in this context.

If you have an objection to this way forward, please send your reasoning to
the list by March 14th.

thanks,

Ted