Re: [rtcweb] Current state of signaling discussion

Iñaki Baz Castillo <ibc@aliax.net> Tue, 18 October 2011 22:04 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 C668E21F8B10 for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 18 Oct 2011 15:04:15 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.636
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.636 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.041, BAYES_00=-2.599, FM_FORGED_GMAIL=0.622, MIME_8BIT_HEADER=0.3, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1]
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 YDP6ubUt870Q for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 18 Oct 2011 15:04:15 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-vw0-f44.google.com (mail-vw0-f44.google.com [209.85.212.44]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 55AD321F8B02 for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Tue, 18 Oct 2011 15:04:15 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by vws5 with SMTP id 5so995170vws.31 for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Tue, 18 Oct 2011 15:04:14 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.52.25.75 with SMTP id a11mr4490703vdg.1.1318975127875; Tue, 18 Oct 2011 14:58:47 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.220.118.143 with HTTP; Tue, 18 Oct 2011 14:58:47 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <CALiegfmJsC+F2XAAKytfT1VOkavPgH5+1QYNX98LwztfcCR=Aw@mail.gmail.com>
References: <4E9D773A.4010705@ericsson.com> <E7E0C331-9943-444F-9D42-782DAD6A7FF3@acmepacket.com> <CABcZeBP0v=q7sH4G4Ehvx7x5b_tyoukS1N0EOm1Ji8URNOeDUw@mail.gmail.com> <F89E752A-820B-4C41-BE14-15B358BFA267@acmepacket.com> <CALiegfmJsC+F2XAAKytfT1VOkavPgH5+1QYNX98LwztfcCR=Aw@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 18 Oct 2011 23:58:47 +0200
Message-ID: <CALiegfkxCMzcNQNi0xUUNpaYAG88HfbM4p6Cs8dAeTJ=EXy6Cg@mail.gmail.com>
From: =?UTF-8?Q?I=C3=B1aki_Baz_Castillo?= <ibc@aliax.net>
To: Hadriel Kaplan <HKaplan@acmepacket.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Cc: "rtcweb@ietf.org" <rtcweb@ietf.org>, "rtcweb-chairs@tools.ietf.org" <rtcweb-chairs@tools.ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [rtcweb] Current state of signaling discussion
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, 18 Oct 2011 22:04:15 -0000

2011/10/18 Iñaki Baz Castillo <ibc@aliax.net>;:
> Hi Hadriel, if ROAP draft specifies all the points above it becomes an
> entire signaling protocol, and AFAIK we don't want that.

I've understood the motivation of your mail after re-reading it. Of
course you don't want a default signaling protocol :)

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