IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [rtcweb] Call for Consensus on Use Case for Screen/Application/Desktop sharing

"Olle E. Johansson" <oej@edvina.net> Mon, 19 September 2011 10:20 UTC

Return-Path: <oej@edvina.net>
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 D81F021F8A7A for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 19 Sep 2011 03:20:48 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.239
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.239 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.010, BAYES_00=-2.599, HELO_EQ_SE=0.35]
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 LUVy9-Vj7cl9 for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 19 Sep 2011 03:20:47 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from smtp7.webway.se (smtp7.webway.se [212.3.14.205]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 267A621F877F for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Mon, 19 Sep 2011 03:20:47 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [192.168.40.44] (ns.webway.se [87.96.134.125]) by smtp7.webway.se (Postfix) with ESMTPA id 1785E754BCE4; Mon, 19 Sep 2011 10:23:07 +0000 (UTC)
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1244.3)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
From: "Olle E. Johansson" <oej@edvina.net>
In-Reply-To: <4E770A02.6070009@ericsson.com>
Date: Mon, 19 Sep 2011 12:23:06 +0200
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <0E8B5057-C00C-4596-A908-990DD9ADA7EE@edvina.net>
References: <4E76E8E8.2050102@ericsson.com> <504F8A52-0D1E-4334-A77C-14BCB4349F79@edvina.net> <4E770A02.6070009@ericsson.com>
To: Magnus Westerlund <magnus.westerlund@ericsson.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1244.3)
Cc: "rtcweb@ietf.org" <rtcweb@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [rtcweb] Call for Consensus on Use Case for Screen/Application/Desktop sharing
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: Mon, 19 Sep 2011 10:20:49 -0000

19 sep 2011 kl. 11:23 skrev Magnus Westerlund:

> Olle,
> 
> On 2011-09-19 09:32, Olle E. Johansson wrote:
>>> Thus the question to the WG is the following.
>>> 
>>> 1) Do you support or object the inclusion of use case A, B or Both in
>>> our Use case document?
>> Yes.
> 
> Can you please clarify if Yes, means Both cases?
THis particular yes was for case A, but I agree with both cases as use cases that will affect the architecture. I don't necessarily mean that these apps has to be part of the RTCweb core. 

Monday morning. A bit more poor clarity than other days :-)

> 
>>> 
>>> 2) Do you have additional comments for or against either of the use cases?
>> Nitpick: Case A also requires user consent.
> 
> Fully agree.
Ok.

/O

v2.31.3 | Report a Bug | By Email | System Status