Re: [rtcweb] Usecase & architecture: Browser application with separate webserver & voipserver

[Matthew Kaufman <[e-mail]>]

On 8/6/2011 6:19 AM, Parthasarathi R (partr) wrote:
> Hi all,
> browser application should have the mechanism by which it interacts 
> with voipserver directly instead of depend on the webserver. This 
> usecase provides the flexibility for the webdeveloper to focus on the 
> webdevelopment and use the existing voipservers for voip services by 
> just invoking the API.
> I'm not very sure whether this usecase is same as sec 4.3.1 as there 
> is no protocol architecture shown:
>          browser--------webservers---web services
>          (Javascript)
>              |
>              ----------------voipservers-----VoIP entity (browser)
> This architecture facilites for webdeveloper to choose the different 
> vendor for webservers & voipservers. It is possible for webserver & 
> voipserver co-located but not mandatory. This architecture is slightly 
> different from draft-rosenberg-rtcweb-framework-00 fig 2 (Browser RTC 
> Trapezoid).  Please let me know your opinion on the same.
>

My opinion is that as long as the "voipservers" use HTTP-based signaling 
and RTCWEB-compatible VoIP, then that's fine, and indistinguishable from 
other use cases. But if the "voipservers" are existing SIP servers then 
no, I don't want additional inflexible code in the browser that turns it 
into a SIP phone.

Matthew Kaufman