[rtcweb] Comment on draft-ietf-rtcweb-overview-02 (Browser RTC trapezoid)

"Ravindran Parthasarathi" <pravindran@sonusnet.com> Tue, 18 October 2011 23:13 UTC

Return-Path: <pravindran@sonusnet.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 ACFDC1F0C36 for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 18 Oct 2011 16:13:08 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.908
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.908 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.310, BAYES_00=-2.599, HTML_MESSAGE=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 eTH09q2pucUL for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 18 Oct 2011 16:13:07 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-ma01.sonusnet.com (sonussf2.sonusnet.com [208.45.178.27]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6520C21F8AEC for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Tue, 18 Oct 2011 16:13:07 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from sonusmail06.sonusnet.com (sonusmail06.sonusnet.com [10.128.32.156]) by sonuspps2.sonusnet.com (8.14.3/8.14.3) with ESMTP id p9INDZIA025507; Tue, 18 Oct 2011 19:13:35 -0400
Received: from sonusinmail02.sonusnet.com ([10.70.51.30]) by sonusmail06.sonusnet.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.4675); Tue, 18 Oct 2011 19:13:01 -0400
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5
Content-class: urn:content-classes:message
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----_=_NextPart_001_01CC8DEB.78691B7E"
Date: Wed, 19 Oct 2011 04:42:56 +0530
Message-ID: <2E239D6FCD033C4BAF15F386A979BF511599F9@sonusinmail02.sonusnet.com>
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
Thread-Topic: Comment on draft-ietf-rtcweb-overview-02 (Browser RTC trapezoid)
Thread-Index: AcyN6kSGwJVD/poTSuCXs2g3Vz18Sw==
From: "Ravindran Parthasarathi" <pravindran@sonusnet.com>
To: "Harald Alvestrand" <harald@alvestrand.no>
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 18 Oct 2011 23:13:01.0275 (UTC) FILETIME=[7B52B2B0:01CC8DEB]
Cc: rtcweb@ietf.org
Subject: [rtcweb] Comment on draft-ietf-rtcweb-overview-02 (Browser RTC trapezoid)
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, 18 Oct 2011 23:13:08 -0000

Harald,

 

In Fig 2 (Browser RTC Trapezoid), I'm getting the feel that JS/HTML
communicates with webserver directly without the involvement of browser.
Please clarify whether it is intended not to use browser  for JS.

 

IMO, the browser RTC trapezoid shall be 

 

                   +-----------+             +-----------+

                   |   RTCWeb  |  Federation |   RTCWeb  |

                   |           |  Signaling  |           |

                   |           |-------------|           |

                   |  Server   |   protocol  |  Server   |

                   |           |             |           |

                   +-----------+             +-----------+

                        /                           \

                       /                             \   RTCWeb

                      /                               \  Signaling

                     /                                 \

                    /  RTCWeb                           \

                   /   Signaling                         \

                  /                                       \

            +-----------+                           +-----------+

            |           |                           |           |

            |           |                           |           |

            |  Browser  | ------------------------- |  Browser  |

            |           |          Media path       |           |

            |           |                           |           |

            +-----------+                           +-----------+

            +-----------+                           +-----------+

            |JS/HTML/CSS|                           |JS/HTML/CSS|

            +-----------+                           +-----------+

 


I explained the same diagram in Fig 1 of
draft-partha-rtcweb-signaling-00. RTCWeb signaling shall be proprietary
HTTP/websocket. I'm asking this change because I'm seeing folks confuses
API vs. on-wire-protocol. Also, Please note that JS + browser is the
single system with two different modules and it shall have protocol or
API to communicate (without passing any information in the wire). Could
you please let me know in case I'm missing something.

 

Thanks

Partha