Re: [rtcweb] *MUST* DCEP?

[Ted Hardie <[e-mail]>]

On Tue, Mar 4, 2014 at 11:03 AM, Paul Kyzivat <[e-mail]> wrote:

> Ted,
>
> (I think this was open issue #8)
>
> You closed discussion on this, saying that this should be specified in
> some rtcweb "system" document. IIUC, then I disagree.
>
> This is important to others besides rtcweb. We want to use this mechanism,
> both with and without components that are implementing rtcweb. Certainly
> for non-browsers.
>
>
Help me understand why it wouldn't then be in their systems documents?

Ted




> This ultimately comes down to what I can expect after having negotiated
> (in SDP) the establishment of an SCTP association. When doing so, I use
> a=sctpmap to negotiate the how the association will be used. If I intend to
> use data channels and DCEP then I want an assurance that the other end does
> too. (That is the purpose of the SDP negotiation.)
>
> AFAIK, current when I specify 'a=sctpmap:webrtc-datachannel' (or
> 'a=sctp-datachannel' depending on where I look), that means the other side
> supports data channels *and* guarantees support for DCEP. There is no means
> to indicate support for data channels *without* DCEP.
>
> I don't see any urgent need to have data channels without DCEP, as long as
> *use* of DCEP is optional.
>
> IMO things would be less confusing if the two documents were merged into
> one, that defines the *Data Channel Protocol* (that runs over SCTP). This
> protocol runs over pairs of SCTP streams, has a small number of messages
> (open, ack, string-payload, binary-payload, close), and encodes them in
> SCTP using SCTP messages with particular payloads and SCTP stream reset.
> The open and ack messages would be optional.
>
>         Thanks,
>         Paul
>