Re: [rtcweb] The DTMF API [Was: Traffic should be encrypted. (Re: Let's define the purpose of WebRTC)]

Hadriel Kaplan <HKaplan@acmepacket.com> Thu, 17 November 2011 10:18 UTC

Return-Path: <HKaplan@acmepacket.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 0983921F9A90 for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 17 Nov 2011 02:18:15 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.484
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.484 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.115, BAYES_00=-2.599]
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 yk3G02TKSSFk for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 17 Nov 2011 02:18:14 -0800 (PST)
Received: from etmail.acmepacket.com (etmail.acmepacket.com [216.41.24.6]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6503621F9A07 for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Thu, 17 Nov 2011 02:18:14 -0800 (PST)
Received: from MAIL2.acmepacket.com (10.0.0.22) by etmail.acmepacket.com (216.41.24.6) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 8.2.254.0; Thu, 17 Nov 2011 05:18:11 -0500
Received: from MAIL1.acmepacket.com ([169.254.1.232]) by Mail2.acmepacket.com ([169.254.2.157]) with mapi id 14.01.0270.001; Thu, 17 Nov 2011 05:18:11 -0500
From: Hadriel Kaplan <HKaplan@acmepacket.com>
To: Justin Uberti <juberti@google.com>
Thread-Topic: [rtcweb] The DTMF API [Was: Traffic should be encrypted. (Re: Let's define the purpose of WebRTC)]
Thread-Index: AQHMpRI18rocmJ8hFUu6n08NQZ7j2w==
Date: Thu, 17 Nov 2011 10:18:11 +0000
Message-ID: <9A05449A-C0FB-4548-AA80-728EC82218BB@acmepacket.com>
References: <CAOJ7v-18cNX8xussOPXSEoFxAARu8WriL8XgxPVUXBrWhz=FFg@mail.gmail.com> <4EC28CF5.6000109@jesup.org> <D666B5A5-BF2E-46B7-B97F-06C3736E8357@acmepacket.com> <CAOJ7v-3v5Zu9ZOuL3Qqu+aEDJ4a3cqH+oJ2yj_ewOpxKe=jA_g@mail.gmail.com> <733D6CE2-2360-4688-8268-3503F7E2460C@acmepacket.com>
In-Reply-To: <733D6CE2-2360-4688-8268-3503F7E2460C@acmepacket.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-originating-ip: [216.41.24.34]
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-ID: <1B74D3B6C6F00C40AAC3F9E3D1E2EC01@acmepacket.com>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Brightmail-Tracker: AAAAAQAAAWE=
Cc: Randell Jesup <randell-ietf@jesup.org>, "<rtcweb@ietf.org>" <rtcweb@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [rtcweb] The DTMF API [Was: Traffic should be encrypted. (Re: Let's define the purpose of WebRTC)]
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: Thu, 17 Nov 2011 10:18:15 -0000

FYI - I asked an expert and he said that for the default DTMF duration that although 50ms is the official minimum, in practice it's safer to use 100ms and people often do that (or even longer but we don't need to).  We also need to have a 50ms gap minimum.
So basically confirming what was already stated in other emails in this thread.

-hadriel


On Nov 16, 2011, at 1:38 AM, Hadriel Kaplan wrote:

> 
> On Nov 16, 2011, at 1:13 AM, Justin Uberti wrote:
> 
>> [Local]MediaStreamTrack.sendDTMF(in DOMString tones, in optional long duration)
>> 
>> ex:
>> sendDTMF("1")  // plays tone 1 for 50 ms
>> sendDTMF("2", 200)  // plays tone 2 for 200 ms
>> sendDTMF("123")  // plays tones 1, 2, 3 in succession, each for 50 ms
>> sendDTMF("456", 200)  // plays tones 4, 5, 6 in succession, each for 200 ms
> 
> Sounds good to me, but supporting a multi-digit-string as you did above reminds me that I'll have to check with some experts if this is ok - it reminded me there have been issues with DTMFs being too close to each other in time, but I am not an expert in that and it may not be an issue at all.  (there were issues in PSTN when multiple DTMFs were generated back-to-back from a saved address-book contact-entry type thing, but it may have only been a problem for using in-band DTMF which won't be an issue here)
> I'll ask.
> 
> -hadriel
> 
> _______________________________________________
> rtcweb mailing list
> rtcweb@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rtcweb