Re: [rtcweb] WGLC of draft-ietf-rtcweb-use-cases-and-requirements-11

"Karl Stahl" <> Tue, 24 September 2013 07:04 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id D722511E8105 for <>; Tue, 24 Sep 2013 00:04:03 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.626
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.626 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.924, BAYES_00=-2.599, GB_I_INVITATION=-2, J_CHICKENPOX_44=0.6, MSGID_MULTIPLE_AT=1.449, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1]
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id SdlfsXRHpLg5 for <>; Tue, 24 Sep 2013 00:03:58 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 83A1011E8107 for <>; Tue, 24 Sep 2013 00:03:56 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ([]) by (Telecom3 SMTP service) with ASMTP id 201309240903546378; Tue, 24 Sep 2013 09:03:54 +0200
From: Karl Stahl <>
To: "'Chenxin (Xin)'" <>,,
References: <> <> <> <07a601ceb64e$5caaba00$16002e00$> <07b001ceb65f$ce3f0cf0$6abd26d0$> <>
In-Reply-To: <>
Date: Tue, 24 Sep 2013 09:03:54 +0200
Message-ID: <09d801ceb8f4$3b50dfd0$b1f29f70$@stahl>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-Mailer: Microsoft Office Outlook 12.0
Thread-Index: AQHOtl/hYQwJQvwb8keiBCP8AmFFOZnUHYEwgABdJ7A=
Content-Language: sv
Subject: Re: [rtcweb] WGLC of draft-ietf-rtcweb-use-cases-and-requirements-11
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: Real-Time Communication in WEB-browsers working group list <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 24 Sep 2013 07:04:04 -0000

-----Ursprungligt meddelande-----
Från: Chenxin (Xin) [] 
Skickat: den 24 september 2013 04:14
Till: Karl Stahl;;
Ämne: RE: [rtcweb] WGLC of draft-ietf-rtcweb-use-cases-and-requirements-11

Hi Karl, 
>-----Original Message-----
>From: [] On 
>Behalf Of Karl Stahl
>Sent: Saturday, September 21, 2013 8:16 AM
>Subject: [rtcweb] WGLC of 
>While reading the draft-ietf-rtcweb-use-cases-and-requirements-11, here 
>are a few "telephony related" WebRTC things I think should be clarified 
>in the use cases.
>3.2.1.  Simple Video Communication Service  Description ...
>The invited user might accept or reject the session.
>[Suggest adding] The invited user might accept only audio, rejecting 
>video (even if a camera is enabled). A user may also select to initiate 
>an audio session, without video.
>And in API requirements:
>   ----------------------------------------------------------------
>   A1      The Web API must provide means for the application to ask the
>browser for permission to use cameras and microphones, individually as 
>input devices. (One must be able to answer with voice only - declining
>   ----------------------------------------------------------------

>Same under
>6.2.  Browser Considerations
>The browser is expected to provide mechanisms for users to revise and 
>even completely revoke consent to use device resources such as camera 
>and microphone. [Suggest adding] Specifically, a user must be given the 
>opportunity to only accept audio in a video call invitation.
[Xin] it is a common use case to accept only audio call and reject the video
and quite useful. But I am doubt that this function should be mixed with
video or audio device access permission . Do I misunderstand your proposal?
I think we could just disable the video stream when signaling. So we could
make video call with one and reject it with other in the same web-service. I
think the audio and video device access permission is not for each call(peer

[Karl] Try using a WebRTC application with Chrome and you will see: The
Permission/Allowance to use Camera and Microphone comes up at a bar at the
top of the browser window and is the actual answering of a call.