Re: [rtcweb] We are moving beyond the assumptions on which O/A is based

[Justin Uberti <[e-mail]>]

On Mon, May 13, 2013 at 1:24 PM, Martin Thomson <[e-mail]>wrote:

> On 11 May 2013 14:08, Bernard Aboba <[e-mail]> wrote:
> > Paul Kyzivat said:
> >
> >> I don't have a specific action to recommend here. This just seems like a
> >> somewhat fundamental shift that out to be recognized. It probably isn't
> >> just RTCWEB and CLUE, it is really related to more complex communication
> >> scenarios. ISTM that CLUE is addressing this by building a layer on top
> >> of O/A, while RTCWEB is *battling* with O/A.
> >
> > [BA] IMHO, the distinction between CLUE and RTCWEB may not be that clear
> > cut, and so the issues (and considerations) that arise in CLUE may also
> come
> > up in RTCWEB, although they may not be recognized as such.
>
> I think that the following statement - if true - would be key:
>
>   WebRTC defines an API that I can use to implement CLUE.
>
> I would like that statement to be true.
>

That is also how I have been looking at the situation.

>
> That is why I find the following just as disturbing as Bernard:
>
> > This is why I find it disturbing for WebRTC and CLUE RTP usage documents
> to
> > come to different conclusions about required RTP functionality *for
> similar
> > scenarios*.  For example, I do not think that the concept of MSID and
> CLUE
> > capture are all that different, so that I do not buy that supporting
> each of
> > these concepts require different solutions. So if we are debating
> whether an
> > RTP extension (or SDES item) is needed to indicate the CLUE capture to
> which
> > an RTP flow pertains, then I would assert that the same logic would apply
> > (or not apply)  to msid.
> _______________________________________________
> rtcweb mailing list
> [e-mail]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rtcweb
>