IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [rtcweb] Clarification on offer/answer in jsep-01

Francois Audet <francois.audet@skype.net> Tue, 28 August 2012 04:48 UTC

Return-Path: <francois.audet@skype.net>
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 4E42A21F8474 for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 27 Aug 2012 21:48:15 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -3.599
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.001, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1]
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 d-proz3IpgjI for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 27 Aug 2012 21:48:14 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from am1outboundpool.messaging.microsoft.com (am1ehsobe003.messaging.microsoft.com [213.199.154.206]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D350A11E808E for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Mon, 27 Aug 2012 21:48:13 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail58-am1-R.bigfish.com (10.3.201.248) by AM1EHSOBE010.bigfish.com (10.3.204.30) with Microsoft SMTP Server id 14.1.225.23; Tue, 28 Aug 2012 04:48:11 +0000
Received: from mail58-am1 (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail58-am1-R.bigfish.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D99F260059; Tue, 28 Aug 2012 04:48:11 +0000 (UTC)
X-Forefront-Antispam-Report: CIP:131.107.125.8; KIP:(null); UIP:(null); IPV:NLI; H:TK5EX14HUBC106.redmond.corp.microsoft.com; RD:none; EFVD:NLI
X-SpamScore: -17
X-BigFish: VS-17(zz98dI1432I14ffIzz1202hzz1033IL8275bh8275dhz2fh2a8h668h839h944hd25he5bhf0ah107ah8f2n1155h)
Received-SPF: pass (mail58-am1: domain of skype.net designates 131.107.125.8 as permitted sender) client-ip=131.107.125.8; envelope-from=francois.audet@skype.net; helo=TK5EX14HUBC106.redmond.corp.microsoft.com ; icrosoft.com ;
Received: from mail58-am1 (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by mail58-am1 (MessageSwitch) id 1346129289823833_23431; Tue, 28 Aug 2012 04:48:09 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from AM1EHSMHS020.bigfish.com (unknown [10.3.201.245]) by mail58-am1.bigfish.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C70802E0045; Tue, 28 Aug 2012 04:48:09 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from TK5EX14HUBC106.redmond.corp.microsoft.com (131.107.125.8) by AM1EHSMHS020.bigfish.com (10.3.207.158) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.1.225.23; Tue, 28 Aug 2012 04:48:09 +0000
Received: from TK5EX14MBXC272.redmond.corp.microsoft.com ([169.254.2.89]) by TK5EX14HUBC106.redmond.corp.microsoft.com ([157.54.80.61]) with mapi id 14.02.0318.003; Tue, 28 Aug 2012 04:48:07 +0000
From: Francois Audet <francois.audet@skype.net>
To: Kaiduan Xie <kaiduanx@gmail.com>
Thread-Topic: [rtcweb] Clarification on offer/answer in jsep-01
Thread-Index: AQHNhL5ATwCPK9RddUyMLXZ9gnO4B5dupybo
Date: Tue, 28 Aug 2012 04:48:07 +0000
Message-ID: <A9BAC738-4077-450F-ACC4-DD246292A2EF@microsoft.com>
References: <CACKRbQfXam_QqsUdMif-zR0uuiM6VFwP-VDy0q7f_r6gdV_-VQ@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CACKRbQfXam_QqsUdMif-zR0uuiM6VFwP-VDy0q7f_r6gdV_-VQ@mail.gmail.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-OriginatorOrg: skype.net
Cc: "rtcweb@ietf.org" <rtcweb@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [rtcweb] Clarification on offer/answer in jsep-01
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: Tue, 28 Aug 2012 04:48:15 -0000

Indeed, this appear to contradict 3264, and would cause breakage.

On Aug 27, 2012, at 18:41, "Kaiduan Xie" <kaiduanx@gmail.com> wrote:

> Hi all,
> 
> I do not understand the statement below from 4.2. Session Descriptions
> and State Machine
> 
> "As in [RFC3264], an offerer can send an offer, and update it as long
> as it has not been answered."
> 
> However, per rfc3264 http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc3264 section 4
> Protocol Operation,
> 
> "At any time, either agent MAY generate a new offer that updates the
> session. However, it MUST NOT generate a new offer if it has
> received an offer which it has not yet answered or rejected.
> Furthermore, it MUST NOT generate a new offer if it has generated a
> prior offer for which it has not yet received an answer or a
> rejection."
> 
> Please look the last sentence. Can anyone explain why JSEP introduces
> something different than RFC3264 please?
> 
> Best regards,
> 
> /Kaiduan
> _______________________________________________
> rtcweb mailing list
> rtcweb@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rtcweb
>

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email