Re: [rtcweb] Definitions of WebRTC entities

Harald Alvestrand <harald@alvestrand.no> Wed, 15 October 2014 04:34 UTC

Return-Path: <harald@alvestrand.no>
X-Original-To: rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id EB9F21A0250 for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 14 Oct 2014 21:34:44 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -0.01
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.01 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01] autolearn=ham
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 9kEv_1xeaRav for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 14 Oct 2014 21:34:41 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mork.alvestrand.no (mork.alvestrand.no [IPv6:2001:700:1:2::117]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5FE1A1A0217 for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Tue, 14 Oct 2014 21:34:41 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mork.alvestrand.no (Postfix) with ESMTP id 798E87C4226; Wed, 15 Oct 2014 06:34:39 +0200 (CEST)
X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at alvestrand.no
Received: from mork.alvestrand.no ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (mork.alvestrand.no [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id XSYyi7BIW0Yd; Wed, 15 Oct 2014 06:34:38 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from [172.30.42.116] (c-58f0e555.03-217-73746f1.cust.bredbandsbolaget.se [85.229.240.88]) by mork.alvestrand.no (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 9CDFD7C328D; Wed, 15 Oct 2014 06:34:38 +0200 (CEST)
Message-ID: <543DF95E.9060302@alvestrand.no>
Date: Wed, 15 Oct 2014 06:34:38 +0200
From: Harald Alvestrand <harald@alvestrand.no>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.1.2
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Parthasarathi R <partha@parthasarathi.co.in>, 'Christer Holmberg' <christer.holmberg@ericsson.com>, rtcweb@ietf.org
References: <542E53D2.5040500@alvestrand.no> <7594FB04B1934943A5C02806D1A2204B1D465376@ESESSMB209.ericsson.se> <C45C84E3-FC63-4DF6-ABDE-701FC7584E3C@alvestrand.no> <7594FB04B1934943A5C02806D1A2204B1D465985@ESESSMB209.ericsson.se> <7594FB04B1934943A5C02806D1A2204B1D465A34@ESESSMB209.ericsson.se> <00f501cfe24a$b8515930$28f40b90$@co.in> <543418D5.8010509@alvestrand.no> <006301cfe316$6d3c5590$47b500b0$@co.in> <54363216.3060700@alvestrand.no> <010d01cfe80f$1c8e3930$55aaab90$@co.in>
In-Reply-To: <010d01cfe80f$1c8e3930$55aaab90$@co.in>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/rtcweb/mNa3krWiwSja5M_FZ7kLjl4jdZU
Subject: Re: [rtcweb] Definitions of WebRTC entities
X-BeenThere: rtcweb@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
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: Wed, 15 Oct 2014 04:34:45 -0000

On 10/15/2014 02:29 AM, Parthasarathi R wrote:
> Hi Harald,
>
> <snip>
>>>> 2) It is not required to be endpoint but it shall be middle box.
>>> What do you mean by "middle box"? Again, that term is slippery.
>> <Partha> I intent to say that the entity which is between two 
>> endpoints and it does not end any media session itself. Here, The 
>> confusion is that WebRTC compatible endpoint which is not an endpoint 
>> but it is a middle box. </Partha>
> Seems that this entity (whatever it's called) isn't an endpoint at all, so defining terms for endpoints shouldn't be relevant to whatever this device is.
>
> There's always more boxes in the middle..... although as long as they don't have the DTLS keys, it's limited what they can do to the packets.
> <snip>
>
> Could you please update the terminology as "WebRTC compatible device" instead of WebRTC compatible endpoint as the entity is not required to be endpoint.

No.

I don't know what the device is, I don't know how to describe it, and I
don't even know if I think it should exist.

I will not define terminology for that.