Re: [rtcweb] JSEP: Order of m- lines in multiple PeerConnections

Suhas Nandakumar <suhasietf@gmail.com> Fri, 18 October 2013 01:16 UTC

Return-Path: <suhasietf@gmail.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 D466D11E80F6 for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 17 Oct 2013 18:16:01 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.699
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.699 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.300, BAYES_00=-2.599, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, J_CHICKENPOX_15=0.6, NO_RELAYS=-0.001]
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 cOTlRucZWNjf for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 17 Oct 2013 18:16:01 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-wi0-x22d.google.com (mail-wi0-x22d.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:400c:c05::22d]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id AA3AF11E8198 for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Thu, 17 Oct 2013 18:16:00 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-wi0-f173.google.com with SMTP id ey11so246586wid.0 for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Thu, 17 Oct 2013 18:15:59 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type; bh=8TH2QmQsy25AMZz7Xe9VDgGeaGIfkgKGGyGgD5tJycM=; b=j0dhurWEJmpAQFHHU5JUh+77RtS8pXdLbsrwBItjTahx567Alh5DKvSyBV+HfhURFW WtPDRDMI47/g1e+S/j8z4NciU15P18bWgGM+m+UqbVlTfhgBUUEhu5X0MEhubPY4vESd RPrnmoEBVuhkSWv/H/2OdNhDlmSE+T2FS9LCR6JxELdOG6jW72PKS+a7pogBDA6piTHF a4fRzMb+iwtlPhow0NtTOf8K57BjdFrFgpO9kyKri8c0NzVW3PScPeKlKzMQmScbK4LL E0zZpRtXOZiRZ9tIac/t1GVfPMO/TwelFGgATrQjKV+n1k1aUwqQhsXrD//MnN3qP317 eI+g==
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.194.20.202 with SMTP id p10mr179698wje.39.1382058959675; Thu, 17 Oct 2013 18:15:59 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.194.178.231 with HTTP; Thu, 17 Oct 2013 18:15:59 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <7594FB04B1934943A5C02806D1A2204B1C4AFB57@ESESSMB209.ericsson.se>
References: <7594FB04B1934943A5C02806D1A2204B1C4AFB57@ESESSMB209.ericsson.se>
Date: Thu, 17 Oct 2013 18:15:59 -0700
Message-ID: <CAMRcRGRJQ+6a7CnTxVixXpv+zYWLO69J=NeG0-h+SNRhnsTAEg@mail.gmail.com>
From: Suhas Nandakumar <suhasietf@gmail.com>
To: Christer Holmberg <christer.holmberg@ericsson.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="047d7b5d965759a80f04e8f9adfc"
Cc: "rtcweb@ietf.org" <rtcweb@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [rtcweb] JSEP: Order of m- lines in multiple PeerConnections
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: Fri, 18 Oct 2013 01:16:02 -0000

Hi Christer,

One idea is to pass the Peer Connection Object to be forked as input to the
Fork API when creating the new Peer Connection.

This way the implementation knows that the order of m=lines must   be
matched to the ones in the passed in reference peer connection object ..

Any thoughts ??

Thanks
Suhas


On Mon, Sep 30, 2013 at 1:07 AM, Christer Holmberg <
christer.holmberg@ericsson.com> wrote:

>  Hi,****
>
> ** **
>
> JSEP talks about the usage of multiple PeerConnection to support forking,
> i.e. for each new forked leg (SIP: early dialog) a new PeerConnection is
> created.****
>
> ** **
>
> As has been indicated, as each new PeerConnection will have its own set of
> address properties, ICE properties etc, so a new Offer will have to be
> created and sent to inform the remote about the new properties.****
>
> ** **
>
> So far so I good.****
>
> ** **
>
> I also assume that the same camera/mic/etc sources are connection to each
> PeerConnection, so the number of m- lines in the Offer of the new
> PeerConnection should be the same.****
>
> ** **
>
> However, according the 3264, the *ORDER of the m- lines* also need to be
> kept the same.****
>
> ** **
>
> So, my question is: how can I ensure that the order of the m- lines in an
> Offer for a new PeerConnection is the same as in an Offer for an old
> PeerConnection?****
>
> ** **
>
> Regards,****
>
> ** **
>
> Christer****
>
> ** **
>
> _______________________________________________
> rtcweb mailing list
> rtcweb@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rtcweb
>
>