IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [rtcweb] Call for comment on document split

Cullen Jennings <fluffy@cisco.com> Fri, 17 June 2011 17:12 UTC

Return-Path: <fluffy@cisco.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 3708F21F84A5 for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 17 Jun 2011 10:12:07 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -110.599
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-110.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-8, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 0t8lUVPwZvzv for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 17 Jun 2011 10:12:06 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from sj-iport-2.cisco.com (sj-iport-2.cisco.com [171.71.176.71]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A15E521F84A0 for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Fri, 17 Jun 2011 10:11:39 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=fluffy@cisco.com; l=811; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1308330699; x=1309540299; h=subject:mime-version:from:in-reply-to:date:cc: content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references:to; bh=QOOG52Zk9OWrmEEqMA39Fs6nx6kxQphfbY690Fc7mqQ=; b=XkyvlHyjvKo/ZOzbL7GZn3SJyEhVyBVWhr6pvn4l6e0l2wUONBp+86NV HcWf8n1rPfWq6kyzLcj4Ha3Al0xn3Q1fPfj4rrxQcX/co+EV39JQDK37u mpLLbE1AN5+UhcLqLHOmdKvJshdtG4w8Wb1zFAJftNL9egHxHotO5ZfYJ I=;
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: AgUIAEOK+02rRDoI/2dsb2JhbABSmAiOSHeIc6B0ng+GJwSHIIo+hF+LPQ
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.65,382,1304294400"; d="scan'208";a="379251776"
Received: from mtv-core-3.cisco.com ([171.68.58.8]) by sj-iport-2.cisco.com with ESMTP; 17 Jun 2011 17:11:39 +0000
Received: from [192.168.4.100] (rcdn-fluffy-8712.cisco.com [10.99.9.19]) by mtv-core-3.cisco.com (8.14.3/8.14.3) with ESMTP id p5HHBcPG026926; Fri, 17 Jun 2011 17:11:38 GMT
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1084)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
From: Cullen Jennings <fluffy@cisco.com>
In-Reply-To: <4DFAE451.9030105@dcrocker.net>
Date: Fri, 17 Jun 2011 11:11:38 -0600
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <6718BDE0-1C0F-4AF6-BAF4-F67E9A25AE82@cisco.com>
References: <BANLkTinu402NoPovU6nDWAKKUBKfbJyk3Q@mail.gmail.com> <4DFAE451.9030105@dcrocker.net>
To: dcrocker@bbiw.net
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1084)
Cc: rtcweb@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [rtcweb] Call for comment on document split
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: Fri, 17 Jun 2011 17:12:07 -0000

On Jun 16, 2011, at 11:21 PM, Dave CROCKER wrote:

> 
> 
> If someone wants to implement the simplest, core capability that is useful within this context of service, how many docs are they going to have to read?

Just as a random guess, probably around 20 to 50. This is a bit more complicated that email. There's not consensus on what the set would be yet but I would guess that in the end we will end up with a list of docs a browser would need to implement (beyond what they already implement) that is roughly along the lines of:  the docs on RTP, SRTP and various keying approach, various audio and video codecs, various offer answer schemes, the whole ICE family of docs including STUN and TURN families, a bunch of docs on SDP and various offer answer schemes.

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email