Re: [rtcweb] Requiring ICE for RTC calls

Tim Panton <> Fri, 30 September 2011 13:27 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id AACF121F8A6F for <>; Fri, 30 Sep 2011 06:27:21 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.402
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.402 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.103, BAYES_00=-2.599, MIME_8BIT_HEADER=0.3]
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id ruBpKkqHy5km for <>; Fri, 30 Sep 2011 06:27:21 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 30ED421F86A4 for <>; Fri, 30 Sep 2011 06:27:20 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [] (unknown []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4233F37A902; Fri, 30 Sep 2011 14:43:02 +0100 (BST)
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1244.3)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
From: Tim Panton <>
In-Reply-To: <>
Date: Fri, 30 Sep 2011 14:30:11 +0100
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <>
References: <><><><><>, <>, <> <BLU152-W62B7F2AC3F0D5B6E277CB993F00@phx.gbl> <> <02f701cc7efe$8b44b2f0$a1ce18d0$@us> <> <>
To: "\"Martin J. Dürst\"" <>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1244.3)
Cc: "<>" <>
Subject: Re: [rtcweb] Requiring ICE for RTC calls
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: Fri, 30 Sep 2011 13:27:21 -0000

On 30 Sep 2011, at 06:15, Martin J. Dürst wrote:

> On 2011/09/30 9:40, Hadriel Kaplan wrote:
>> But it's not "POTS" that's really the point - it's the "PSTN".  From the perspective of this group, the "PSTN" is everything reachable through SIP service providers: every cell/mobile phone, DSL/Cablemodem MTA, PRI trunk, SIP Enterprise trunk, POTS landline, etc.
>> And way more of those than number of users and Web Browsers on the Internet.[2]
> Just for the record:
> This seems to be based on the assumption that a) mobile phones don't have browsers (many of them do) and b) that each user has only one browser (many of them have installed (and use) more than one; many people don't even realize they have installed (and use) more than one because browsers and their components are used behind the scenes in all kinds of shapes and forms.

c) it defines the problem space in terms of SIP reachability - then un-surprisingly concludes that we need to reach
devices via SIP.  

Most of those users are directly reachable via the GSM Um radio interface - but I don't see  any need to add Um constructs to rtcweb. Or looked at different way - the stated group perspective is wrong IMHO .

Tim (speaking for no-one but himself).