IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [rtcweb] Summary of Application Developers' opinions of the current WebRTC API and SDP as a control surface

Eric Rescorla <ekr@rtfm.com> Wed, 03 July 2013 22:28 UTC

Return-Path: <ekr@rtfm.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 CA3AA21F9BCB for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 3 Jul 2013 15:28:30 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -101.852
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-101.852 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.224, BAYES_00=-2.599, FM_FORGED_GMAIL=0.622, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, J_CHICKENPOX_55=0.6, MIME_8BIT_HEADER=0.3, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
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 c2sDV9Jwc9wf for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 3 Jul 2013 15:28:25 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-qe0-f44.google.com (mail-qe0-f44.google.com [209.85.128.44]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DC84721F9BCA for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Wed, 3 Jul 2013 15:28:24 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-qe0-f44.google.com with SMTP id 5so430242qeb.31 for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Wed, 03 Jul 2013 15:28:23 -0700 (PDT)
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:x-originating-ip:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc:content-type:x-gm-message-state; bh=jEFM09GlefLLVON7UYgWUSPskHsprdcRg3XlAGkvBkw=; b=bRoX9xKMlQE0SZnJvzz9F7f9Ev2c6bu/i/s0fVt4kHsTBa2DPR63abAmSQeeMqVxjT q9nWeDETOmSvKWrI69XZcRRKK3uycXF4Bs55aSEkUIED8cS5rrBRiMhx7XruAZo6/sFs mz7Z5f1ae8Y8F+woHBBalaEz0crBHUFHAlVNVt0TmTRmZkvX+WhwMzXuZMzDhJ4Ta0hV KrAuRV5BXv7RqGHC6xNpgqfh2kLqKu3zRNREudYSQQ5uvwDoSK4mr9EtOJ7FJHXmQQcS BOOniS1X9Xxa9825OOu5ZGSHwHhBBJH6ZLZw9HIWhzMQM2Bn8gDdgy0tULrIh3+5lbaH ZmKw==
X-Received: by 10.49.104.72 with SMTP id gc8mr3887177qeb.35.1372890503340; Wed, 03 Jul 2013 15:28:23 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.49.48.234 with HTTP; Wed, 3 Jul 2013 15:27:43 -0700 (PDT)
X-Originating-IP: [74.95.2.173]
In-Reply-To: <CALiegfk9nqabnnF8tA5Qwg4_XUKB80sMpA59vm_2v3p4k3VOUg@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAJrXDUGMohpBdi-ft-o_uE7ewFkw7wRY9x7gYEncjov7qi-Bew@mail.gmail.com> <CABcZeBPa4wBS8pYq=0wesMOfL6TkeC7QGAZ8pWwOcnkhkJqWfA@mail.gmail.com> <CAJrXDUFxo8P8wxh8jX3019yPQOuwQ0eVdsFmRXsbWdWinnc5oA@mail.gmail.com> <CABcZeBOTKpmFC34waqZ4kA-P8t+E6yY9gX1JFCHhsBH0+CF-Qw@mail.gmail.com> <CALiegfnDD8PAxZMfczV=cZtwx49XDT2+XiRhe5t88cT+xayz5g@mail.gmail.com> <CABcZeBMCGdY=LS0OG22aFdhwU2m_-H4_sHb15SAYBT7e2_4RLQ@mail.gmail.com> <CALiegfk9nqabnnF8tA5Qwg4_XUKB80sMpA59vm_2v3p4k3VOUg@mail.gmail.com>
From: Eric Rescorla <ekr@rtfm.com>
Date: Wed, 03 Jul 2013 15:27:43 -0700
Message-ID: <CABcZeBN-pEN9jK36aN0kkMX9M82tpJr3B6+TQa4ihJgAJW6vKQ@mail.gmail.com>
To: Iñaki Baz Castillo <ibc@aliax.net>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="047d7b677510c4773c04e0a2fa8a"
X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQn+jA8ZqnZXXBrbMizzG62egp/qIBItjqsXVTMRyMthwQTmk+sBOXdAasJ+gXwQ3BnWlP4N
Cc: "rtcweb@ietf.org" <rtcweb@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [rtcweb] Summary of Application Developers' opinions of the current WebRTC API and SDP as a control surface
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, 03 Jul 2013 22:28:30 -0000

On Wed, Jul 3, 2013 at 3:17 PM, Iñaki Baz Castillo <ibc@aliax.net> wrote:

> 2013/7/4 Eric Rescorla <ekr@rtfm.com>:
> > Anyway, it's not like this feature is a surprise to anyone--well at
> > least anyone who was paying attention--it's been a feature of the
> > specification since before the WG was even formed. As I said
> > earlier, it was in the original WHATWG spec that Ian Hickson
> > wrote.
>
> I know, and I was a  "SDP supporter" at the beginning (and much others
> like me who, after dealing with it for something more than just single
> audio+video phone calls, have changed their mind).


This leaves me puzzled by your complaint that the current specification
doesn't support Jingle out of the box, since that's been obvious from the
very beginning and it's not like that's something that required extensive
developer experience to discern. If this is important, why didn't you
complain then?

-Ekr

v2.27.8 | Report a Bug | By Email | System Status