[rtcweb] Clarification question about rtcweb communications

Xavier Marjou <xavier.marjou@orange.com> Wed, 09 November 2011 14:31 UTC

Return-Path: <xavier.marjou@gmail.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 CE71021F8AAF for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 9 Nov 2011 06:31:05 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.259
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.259 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.717, BAYES_00=-2.599, FM_FORGED_GMAIL=0.622, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, 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 de+Y0z+3HShF for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 9 Nov 2011 06:31:05 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-yx0-f172.google.com (mail-yx0-f172.google.com [209.85.213.172]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4FCBD21F84D4 for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Wed, 9 Nov 2011 06:31:05 -0800 (PST)
Received: by yenl7 with SMTP id l7so907639yen.31 for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Wed, 09 Nov 2011 06:31:04 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:sender:date:x-google-sender-auth:message-id:subject :from:to:content-type; bh=xgWVbfPnqItLT7NvUoNUnBzMlHWlVtJ/qmKxEwT7KXc=; b=NCUsBsEivlcOrrXZ4scUn8ObH0caoH29y5rVf2nifNdv3t2DGWDby6fvnJafTx6vKW xM6+6xIu7h+Yl/63h+2jRnvoEC5zx5+n+d+2dmTPVvS3PPsI7ebHX9TNvX9Ks8/ivX53 loB0TmWPMoINZRgA/7CXnGG4DM+FTduouDSRU=
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.101.47.6 with SMTP id z6mr1392844anj.66.1320849064820; Wed, 09 Nov 2011 06:31:04 -0800 (PST)
Sender: xavier.marjou@gmail.com
Received: by 10.236.157.73 with HTTP; Wed, 9 Nov 2011 06:31:04 -0800 (PST)
Date: Wed, 09 Nov 2011 15:31:04 +0100
X-Google-Sender-Auth: 0CA99Fw4IzzJtm4quf6_TpEwW90
Message-ID: <CAErhfrzSrBkY9=7ktgWm=4i3hy0_NwEb=xFgdm5oVO-a8wpcWg@mail.gmail.com>
From: Xavier Marjou <xavier.marjou@orange.com>
To: rtcweb@ietf.org
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="001636ed78004f812104b14e23b9"
Subject: [rtcweb] Clarification question about rtcweb communications
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: Wed, 09 Nov 2011 14:31:05 -0000

Hi,

In the introduction of draft-ietf-rtcweb-rtp-usage-01, one example of
application is "on-demand multimedia streaming". The draft also recommends
tools like RFC4588.

Looking at the charter and at the
draft-ietf-rtcweb-use-cases-and-requirements-06 (sections 4.2 and 4.3),
there is no explicit use-case about it. In other-words, there is no
use-case like a user/browser downloads a video file from another browser or
server.
The words "real-time communication" and "communication" look fuzzy, as it
is not clear if mono-directional streaming is included or not in the scope
of rtcweb communications.

So my question is : is the "on-demand multimedia streaming"
communication use-case in the scope of the WG or not?

Thanks,
Xavier