Re: [rtcweb] New Version Notification for draft-uberti-rtcweb-plan-00.txt

[Bernard Aboba <[e-mail]>]

> [MB] I think you meant to say"..but that is NOT moving along very well."  I do not believe we can make any > statements as to how CLUE identifiers map to MSIDs without doing that taxonomy. 
[BA] MSID has some aspects similar to CLUE identifiers, but it is also trying to do some things that are WebRTC-specific.  This leads me to wonder whether in fact those two aspects couldn't be separated.  If an onaddstream event is thrown when a new SSRC is received, the event handler could handle WebRTC-specific aspects.  If this were done, it seems to me that we might be able to utilize the concept of CLUE capture in both CLUE and WebRTC, and might also get some signaling simplifications in the process.  
> Of course, given that this discussion is happening entirely> on the RTCWEB mailing list as opposed to MMUSIC or even AVTEXT, > which is where we've agreed that the taxonomy
> work will happen, means that we don't have the right people to make
> this decision nor is any conclusion that might occur on this list relative > to CLUE and RTCWEB meaningful in the CLUE context.
[BA] While I sympathize with the desire to try to segregate discussions by topic and WG, the reality is that this particular WebRTC topic is just one "inter-wingled" big ball of string, with inter-related RTP/RTCP and SDP discussions co-mingling with WebRTC and CLUE-specific considerations.  While I know that the orthodox response is that "we don't do architecture (well) in the IETF" if there was ever an argument for a wholistic discussion, it would probably be in a case such as this. 
> I would love it if all the CLUE principles/document authors were on> the RTCWEB mailing list and were following these discussions, but > honestly given the volume of email on the RTCWEB list, it's not
> reasonable to expect such.  What is reasonable is for folks to take
> these threads of discussion to the MMUSIC and AVT related mailing lists.  [/MB]
[BA] While it might be reasonable for folks to take easily characterized issues to the MMUSIC or AVTCORE mailing lists, I am not sure that discussions over the relative roles of RTP/RTCP and SDP or CLUE capture vs. MSID can be handled on individual lists.  Also, there may be a distinction between what is "reasonable" and what is likely to be "productive" (although I'm not sure we have enough empirical evidence yet to understand what approaches are likely to fall in the latter bucket).  
> [MB] As an individual, I think that it will be even worse than that,
> as ISTM that some of the information that CLUE might be sending in > the CLUE channel will be sent in SDP in the RTCWEB context. [/MB]
[BA] Or even "worser" than that, some information that CLUE implementations might send in RTP or RTCP will be sent in SDP in the RTCWEB context.