IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [rtcweb] Fwd: I-D Action: draft-ietf-rtcweb-sdp-05.txt

Jonathan Lennox <jonathan@vidyo.com> Mon, 10 April 2017 16:43 UTC

Return-Path: <prvs=0273345b3e=jonathan@vidyo.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 85163129566 for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 10 Apr 2017 09:43:53 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.1
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.1 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, RCVD_IN_SORBS_WEB=1.5, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=no autolearn_force=no
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id XspX2uXkKkuc for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 10 Apr 2017 09:43:52 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mx0b-00198e01.pphosted.com (mx0a-00198e01.pphosted.com [67.231.149.202]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 87C30124282 for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Mon, 10 Apr 2017 09:43:52 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from pps.filterd (m0073109.ppops.net [127.0.0.1]) by mx0a-00198e01.pphosted.com (8.16.0.20/8.16.0.20) with SMTP id v3AGSnub001627; Mon, 10 Apr 2017 12:43:50 -0400
Received: from mail.vidyo.com ([162.209.16.214]) by mx0a-00198e01.pphosted.com with ESMTP id 29prykh8se-1 (version=TLSv1 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NOT); Mon, 10 Apr 2017 12:43:49 -0400
Received: from 492132-EXCH1.vidyo.com ([fe80::50:56ff:fe85:4f77]) by 492133-EXCH2.vidyo.com ([fe80::50:56ff:fe85:6b62%13]) with mapi id 14.03.0195.001; Mon, 10 Apr 2017 11:43:48 -0500
From: Jonathan Lennox <jonathan@vidyo.com>
To: Suhas Nandakumar <suhasietf@gmail.com>
CC: "rtcweb@ietf.org" <rtcweb@ietf.org>
Thread-Topic: [rtcweb] Fwd: I-D Action: draft-ietf-rtcweb-sdp-05.txt
Thread-Index: AQHSshjkYQfIzpgsdUWA8V96t2hjrqG/IuuA
Date: Mon, 10 Apr 2017 16:43:47 +0000
Message-ID: <98A1C2D6-34FE-405E-8405-83F654B43188@vidyo.com>
References: <149179817951.3103.12674759956021329524@ietfa.amsl.com> <CAMRcRGRrRg3j1g-WPGr5ZBJvDA6LD94dwf++vK563euUp49Yfg@mail.gmail.com> <8D61576D-716E-4CF5-B330-EB4A9A9D6B6D@vidyo.com> <CAMRcRGTPGEob_biZ3X80UtH948EYn7P3c6ZTsxrF1rYC9H_AdQ@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAMRcRGTPGEob_biZ3X80UtH948EYn7P3c6ZTsxrF1rYC9H_AdQ@mail.gmail.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-originating-ip: [160.79.219.114]
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_98A1C2D634FE405E840583F654B43188vidyocom_"
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=fsecure engine=2.50.10432:, , definitions=2017-04-10_12:, , signatures=0
X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=outbound_notspam policy=outbound score=0 priorityscore=1501 malwarescore=0 suspectscore=0 phishscore=0 bulkscore=0 spamscore=0 clxscore=1011 lowpriorityscore=0 impostorscore=0 adultscore=0 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=8.0.1-1702020001 definitions=main-1704100131
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/rtcweb/dSwM2sTeCk2Z_SxxFQO7dEL4vz4>
Subject: Re: [rtcweb] Fwd: I-D Action: draft-ietf-rtcweb-sdp-05.txt
X-BeenThere: rtcweb@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
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: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/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: Mon, 10 Apr 2017 16:43:53 -0000

I like “Annotated Example SDP for WebRTC”, since I think that’ll be the clearest for the intended audience, but since you're document editor I think this is ultimately your decision.

On Apr 10, 2017, at 12:38 PM, Suhas Nandakumar <suhasietf@gmail.com<mailto:suhasietf@gmail.com>> wrote:

Hi Jonathan

   You are right on the article part and happy to change it. I like  “Annotated Example SDP for WebRTC." or " “Annotated Example SDP for RtcWeb"  or replace WebRTC/RtcWeb with JSEP ..

Let's finalize one and I can make the updates

Cheers
Suhas

On Mon, Apr 10, 2017 at 9:21 AM, Jonathan Lennox <jonathan@vidyo.com<mailto:jonathan@vidyo.com>> wrote:
Not to start a bikeshed, but the title “SDP for the WebRTC” isn’t very good.

First of all, “WebRTC” doesn’t usually take an article.

Secondly, the title doesn’t make clear that this contains annotated examples.

I’d suggest something like “Annotated Example SDP for WebRTC.” (or perhaps "for JSEP”).

On Apr 10, 2017, at 12:25 AM, Suhas Nandakumar <suhasietf@gmail.com<mailto:suhasietf@gmail.com>> wrote:

Hello All

  I submitted version-05 that includes:
     - IPv6 examples
     - fix idnits errors

look forward for your feedback


cheers
Suhas

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: <internet-drafts@ietf.org<mailto:internet-drafts@ietf.org>>
Date: Sun, Apr 9, 2017 at 9:22 PM
Subject: [rtcweb] I-D Action: draft-ietf-rtcweb-sdp-05.txt
To: i-d-announce@ietf.org<mailto:i-d-announce@ietf.org>
Cc: rtcweb@ietf.org<mailto:rtcweb@ietf.org>



A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts directories.
This draft is a work item of the Real-Time Communication in WEB-browsers of the IETF.

        Title           : SDP for the WebRTC
        Authors         : Suhas Nandakumar
                          Cullen Jennings
        Filename        : draft-ietf-rtcweb-sdp-05.txt
        Pages           : 107
        Date            : 2017-04-09

Abstract:
   The Real-Time Communications in WEB-browsers (Rtcweb) working group
   is charged to provide protocol support for direct interactive rich
   communication using audio, video and data between two peers' web
   browsers.  With in the Rtcweb framework, Session Description protocol
   (SDP) is used for negotiating session capabilities between the peers.
   Such a negotiation happens based on the SDP Offer/Answer exchange
   mechanism.

   This document provides an informational reference in describing the
   role of SDP and the Offer/Answer exchange mechanism for the most
   common Rtcweb use-cases.


The IETF datatracker status page for this draft is:
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-rtcweb-sdp/

There are also htmlized versions available at:
https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-rtcweb-sdp-05
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-rtcweb-sdp-05

A diff from the previous version is available at:
https://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=draft-ietf-rtcweb-sdp-05


Please note that it may take a couple of minutes from the time of submission
until the htmlized version and diff are available at tools.ietf.org<http://tools.ietf.org/>.

Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP at:
ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/

_______________________________________________
rtcweb mailing list
rtcweb@ietf.org<mailto:rtcweb@ietf.org>
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rtcweb

_______________________________________________
rtcweb mailing list
rtcweb@ietf.org<mailto:rtcweb@ietf.org>
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rtcweb

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email