Re: [rtcweb] DTMF resolution proposal

i- I personally would prefer not to leave a grey area (after all, the gap between retransmitted end-packets is another value, which needs to be known/determined/provided).

ii- I wouldn’t mind if the min-value for retransmission gap is 10ms, or even 0ms, and actually would prefer 0ms as it does not impose any restrictions (this all assuming –which IMHO is not the right choice- that the limits will be specified in rtcweb-audio draft rather than in W3C specification)

iii- It is not clear to me whether the use of the word “WebRTC endpoint” by default covers gateways as well. draft-ietf-rtcweb-gateways-02 has the following:
   A WebRTC gateway appears as a WebRTC-compatible endpoint, and will
   thus not be conformant with all requirements for a WebRTC endpoint
   (it does not do everything a WebRTC endpoint does), but is able to
   interoperate with WebRTC endpoints.
I interpret this as “Anything, which is mandated for webrtc-endpoints and not explicitly specified as not applicable for gateways in  rtcweb-gateway document is applicable for gateways too”, in which case I would suggest adding a statement to rtcweb-gateway document that RFC4733 limits do not apply to it (just trying to prevent the possibility of interworking).

iv- I don’t understand why retransmission gap limit would require RFC4733 update whereas the other limits under consideration don’t.

Thanks,
Tolga

From: Roman Shpount [mailto:roman@telurix.com]
Sent: Tuesday, March 08, 2016 7:57 PM
To: Asveren, Tolga <tasveren@sonusnet.com>
Cc: Ted Hardie <ted.ietf@gmail.com>; Jean-Marc Valin <jmvalin@mozilla.com>; Cullen Jennings <fluffy@cisco.com>; rtcweb@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [rtcweb] DTMF resolution proposal

Unless someone objects, I think the language would be:

WebRTC endpoints generated events MUST have duration of no more than 8000 ms and no less than 40 ms with the recommended default duration of 100 ms for each tone. The gap between events MUST be no less then 30 ms with the recommended default duration of 70 ms.

WebRTC endpoints limits this language to browsers and removes this requirements from the gateways.

I do not think we should add any language about retransmission of the final packets since this will cause another unnecessary debate (for instance I think the value of 20 ms is wrong and it should be much shorter). If you want to change this please write an update draft for RFC 4733 and we can discuss it there.

Regards,
_____________
Roman Shpount

On Tue, Mar 8, 2016 at 2:24 AM, Asveren, Tolga <tasveren@sonusnet.com<mailto:tasveren@sonusnet.com>> wrote:
Would the text be crafted so that it pertains *only* to the RFC4733 digit packets emitted by a browser?

Information about gap between retransmission of the final packet could be useful as well and I suggest 20ms for that one.

Thanks,
Tolga

From: rtcweb [mailto:rtcweb-bounces@ietf.org<mailto:rtcweb-bounces@ietf.org>] On Behalf Of Ted Hardie
Sent: Monday, March 07, 2016 5:19 PM
To: Jean-Marc Valin <jmvalin@mozilla.com<mailto:jmvalin@mozilla.com>>
Cc: Cullen Jennings <fluffy@cisco.com<mailto:fluffy@cisco.com>>; rtcweb@ietf.org<mailto:rtcweb@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [rtcweb] DTMF resolution proposal

On Mon, Mar 7, 2016 at 1:23 PM, Jean-Marc Valin <jmvalin@mozilla.com<mailto:jmvalin@mozilla.com>> wrote:
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA256

As proposed by Roman, I think we should also include the "minimum gap
of 30 ms". Otherwise, I support the proposal.

Thank you Jean-Marc; I had not thought to include that in my note, but I agree.
regards,
Ted

        Jean-Marc

On 03/07/2016 03:35 PM, Ted Hardie wrote:
> We've had about 60 or so messages on this topic, and the rough
> consensus seems to be align this document with the limits set out
> in the W3C work here:
>
> https://www.w3.org/TR/webrtc/#rtcdtmfsender
>
> However, there was also a proposal to slightly modify those limits.
>  They are currently:
>
> "The duration cannot be more than 6000 ms or less than 40 ms. The
> default duration is 100 ms for each tone."
>
> Based on Roman's note, a minimum of 40ms and a maximum 8000 ms to
> align with the ITU and RFC2833.
>
> To resolve this, I propose that we ask the WebRTC group to raise
> their max to 8000 and, on receiving a positive response, publish
> this document with 40/8000 as the min and max.  If they give a
> negative response, we retain 40/6000.  This values alignment
> between the two documents higher than the reference 2833, but that
> seems sensible in this context.
>
> If you have an objection to this way forward, please send your
> reasoning to the list by March 14th.
>
> thanks,
>
> Ted
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________ rtcweb mailing
> list rtcweb@ietf.org<mailto:rtcweb@ietf.org> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rtcweb
>
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2

iQEcBAEBCAAGBQJW3fE5AAoJEJ6/8sItn9q9KDgH/j4bSutkSjUmvt6aTtt26qF6
FKF2JMkrZc8pjSg6IDTq9MJradJr8WSzr27VSpedWOHHPFf5z4jDn6IpVVMyTUtP
Jj6MvAPTyf9uB7UGq8rfA9y6az9OjChsJZ3j2/yPk7i/bnVYObg0OXOItyPA2+kA
7KCJAIWUiIBdfifKV8W1qre5DbUVi4iXnGIzbQ5KJIpxrO3Cxrq+vlPy7Gznc1a1
o4B50DU6p3nBILGgCXpFwAMW5PBfco/oAOzCH90gqcM8hzEROW50LTJED/OP0K/b
S3LMG3M+BriuAaslwW/Tj0qm3VUqtFpKaE3I0zjlxUbvfsxg/JYju2ebGSslZ7I=
=dpJA
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

_______________________________________________
rtcweb mailing list
rtcweb@ietf.org<mailto:rtcweb@ietf.org>
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rtcweb