IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [rtcweb] We are moving beyond the assumptions on which O/A is based

Justin Uberti <juberti@google.com> Tue, 14 May 2013 00:37 UTC

Return-Path: <juberti@google.com>
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 CC1E721F8605 for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 13 May 2013 17:37:23 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -101.102
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-101.102 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.875, BAYES_00=-2.599, FM_FORGED_GMAIL=0.622, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, NO_RELAYS=-0.001, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
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 DIZphIVMJ5X0 for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 13 May 2013 17:37:23 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-ia0-x232.google.com (mail-ia0-x232.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4001:c02::232]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6E62121F85E8 for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Mon, 13 May 2013 17:37:21 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-ia0-f178.google.com with SMTP id i9so4204391iad.23 for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Mon, 13 May 2013 17:37:21 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=20120113; h=x-received:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id :subject:to:cc:content-type; bh=a+3zuANDyA3usKF0mEh8pae2Nuxq9fCcGB18WQmJCIA=; b=JIubuPklhLrHjtOoYeRWXjD6v1la/S9MMOFU+CWbOgMkK7oirpxdtKxl3gjZwTFw8l y1PXD71h45rDZDvFndLm921SokHdaE9nMe9NCpf7yZ6t9/s43jmrGCdmKyveT/M7lZbX AzUE8U54BMNlhT0roWvknufRvjlP8rDs14QF9EFUf35tPGwafivUR4meBF8L8og0ALa+ QwbJEXZUzwfUledmc46in++kLZavaUhTMoiywAvQPk6PdWLsRZL5lY54AJ7ZoTAqWxbm PWWE3a4Fm+CvKosvifS9HKg+ExENawP4PIzGYyylAV4/90KNRlsVfAEqfs0rO9c6a2Pf v8xg==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=20120113; h=x-received:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id :subject:to:cc:content-type:x-gm-message-state; bh=a+3zuANDyA3usKF0mEh8pae2Nuxq9fCcGB18WQmJCIA=; b=QD23rGz79dh1aCMjKuyeTIP5sgXf1DkBbakEceWZtO0rG6kvUn4pdyK5n9vDikdEQd J+EgSoN/brOoPuGP1Vkji8e16IHy4da8oWb5GElq3sxXa+cU2z7y/7DCoXgZMdcdI+B7 bU0O5+67USi28XgZ4f6DRwbaSBLvH8UJp1lumgIv1e9+zMKGKuenos6RTH9G8uS28RKL 8K6e2alvpBn/uPW5yguHBfo5rc/21QUpagpFjIIeD/or2QOaI3yGrFpQdXEjDOScT9lR 4HsCTCYuO3vXdfifKzxpl3WKI/1BfaGB2Dz4oUv53kdqE3pAJGheWy+O30fMe7lKKGP0 icDQ==
X-Received: by 10.50.136.199 with SMTP id qc7mr420008igb.42.1368491841046; Mon, 13 May 2013 17:37:21 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.231.193.201 with HTTP; Mon, 13 May 2013 17:37:00 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <518F67E1.3040205@jitsi.org>
References: <20130503054601.4639.64651.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> <CALe60zAi_Lx3QFCbBQ5aPNkgorJAff0E79jkpbQX1Qt3wf2bzg@mail.gmail.com> <CAOJ7v-1Wk6u7XiYrNVmoqr5Jisu2WRvZpte7hQTOiP8YHUc6hg@mail.gmail.com> <518A1268.8090107@ericsson.com> <01AB1BF5-7ABF-4DD3-A831-3A6C96EA680C@iii.ca> <1447FA0C20ED5147A1AA0EF02890A64B1C2C818F@ESESSMB209.ericsson.se> <518E7700.1080906@alum.mit.edu> <518F67E1.3040205@jitsi.org>
From: Justin Uberti <juberti@google.com>
Date: Mon, 13 May 2013 17:37:00 -0700
Message-ID: <CAOJ7v-0wjNDLbSX22NaW2RshK2qPrXj8RvjCNAtQqDZaadmpzg@mail.gmail.com>
To: Emil Ivov <emcho@jitsi.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="089e0139fb4210563d04dca2d653"
X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQmig3KV77mJkLXfbyxG+i4Q0nJ7EZB9Br1ZL5LHEHJ8lzuqy7na4qMy9ZGSQTPYDi2+PPl5eE7e8FO1250Eunlt1TTNHe7J5FK/VqAG48m5VLADaaYYPUC0cqVXM0LZRt+kGT2DShVMmbhQEvY8jy9e7t51BxuTI449PZ+hbXg3gPBVpNgw4pft7MYZpKOcfCkCGG/G
Cc: "rtcweb@ietf.org" <rtcweb@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [rtcweb] We are moving beyond the assumptions on which O/A is based
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: Tue, 14 May 2013 00:37:24 -0000

On Sun, May 12, 2013 at 2:58 AM, Emil Ivov <emcho@jitsi.org> wrote:

>
>
> On 11.05.13, 19:51, Paul Kyzivat wrote:
> > I don't have a specific action to recommend here. This just seems like a
> > somewhat fundamental shift that out to be recognized. It probably isn't
> > just RTCWEB and CLUE, it is really related to more complex communication
> > scenarios. ISTM that CLUE is addressing this by building a layer on top
> > of O/A, while RTCWEB is *battling* with O/A.
>
> That's a nice way to put it. Interestingly the CLUE approach to take
> this out of O/A seems to be more in line with the RTCWEB paradigm than
> both Plan A or Plan B.
>
> The decision not to implement an official signalling RTCWEB protocol was
> taken very early in this working group and there was very strong
> consensus on the fact that imposing a specific signalling protocol would
> be incompatible with the web in general.
>
> Still, it seems to me that we are now trying to compensate for the  lack
> of such a signalling protocol by piggybacking on top of O/A and SDP with
> things such as the possibility to turn off individual SSRCs.
>
> Why do we need these things? Aren't they better handled by the API?
>

The same could be said for anything currently handled by SDP, it could be
better handled by a JS-friendly API. I don't see anything special about
turning on individual streams though.

IOW, if SDP is the surface we use to communicate information to the other
side, then it is de facto the best fit for these stream requests.

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email