Re: [rtcweb] Summary of Application Developers' opinions of the current WebRTC API and SDP as a control surface

Stefan Håkansson LK <stefan.lk.hakansson@ericsson.com> Sat, 13 July 2013 18:40 UTC

Return-Path: <stefan.lk.hakansson@ericsson.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 4E69021F9E40 for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 13 Jul 2013 11:40:32 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -5.197
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.197 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.752, BAYES_00=-2.599, HELO_EQ_SE=0.35, MIME_8BIT_HEADER=0.3, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4]
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 Ov1m61goqMmt for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 13 Jul 2013 11:40:26 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mailgw7.ericsson.se (mailgw7.ericsson.se [193.180.251.48]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E900E21F9E3D for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Sat, 13 Jul 2013 11:40:25 -0700 (PDT)
X-AuditID: c1b4fb30-b7ef76d000004bbc-22-51e19f186e96
Received: from ESESSHC004.ericsson.se (Unknown_Domain [153.88.253.125]) by mailgw7.ericsson.se (Symantec Mail Security) with SMTP id 1F.26.19388.81F91E15; Sat, 13 Jul 2013 20:40:24 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from ESESSMB209.ericsson.se ([169.254.9.6]) by ESESSHC004.ericsson.se ([153.88.183.30]) with mapi id 14.02.0328.009; Sat, 13 Jul 2013 20:40:24 +0200
From: =?iso-8859-1?Q?Stefan_H=E5kansson_LK?= <stefan.lk.hakansson@ericsson.com>
To: Peter Thatcher <pthatcher@google.com>
Thread-Topic: [rtcweb] Summary of Application Developers' opinions of the current WebRTC API and SDP as a control surface
Thread-Index: AQHOeDFbTNRhHYI3NkSZeqhrbqmeQg==
Date: Sat, 13 Jul 2013 18:40:23 +0000
Message-ID: <1447FA0C20ED5147A1AA0EF02890A64B1C3134EC@ESESSMB209.ericsson.se>
References: <CAJrXDUGMohpBdi-ft-o_uE7ewFkw7wRY9x7gYEncjov7qi-Bew@mail.gmail.com> <CABcZeBPa4wBS8pYq=0wesMOfL6TkeC7QGAZ8pWwOcnkhkJqWfA@mail.gmail.com> <CAJrXDUFxo8P8wxh8jX3019yPQOuwQ0eVdsFmRXsbWdWinnc5oA@mail.gmail.com> <CABcZeBOTKpmFC34waqZ4kA-P8t+E6yY9gX1JFCHhsBH0+CF-Qw@mail.gmail.com> <1447FA0C20ED5147A1AA0EF02890A64B1C30BC0F@ESESSMB209.ericsson.se> <CAD5OKxtKLMf_d=8GSMrqfNhDHPe9MFP2ZTKzZHFn9CyMr-gSVQ@mail.gmail.com> <1447FA0C20ED5147A1AA0EF02890A64B1C30C833@ESESSMB209.ericsson.se> <CAJrXDUHOZf21aXgQMrdjTV8Fok+fVp-2SuhTra0JGy0Jq=Wi0Q@mail.gmail.com> <CAHp8n2mNdNiXCCNUdEvKgAsh_pPn=jNs+56VCg4PMKbUmOGztQ@mail.gmail.com> <CABkgnnUZMAuDocwZWXn9a+Xj3kkcX0uyRgjDmy-hQxpTDKWj3w@mail.gmail.com> <1447FA0C20ED5147A1AA0EF02890A64B1C30CF49@ESESSMB209.ericsson.se> <CALiegfmiRsOXL97XDzMRQ_Vvbk9zaDBBvCPxr_=zbDJbnMZ_8A@mail.gmail.com> <1447FA0C20ED5147A1AA0EF02890A64B1C30D110@ESESSMB209.ericsson.se> <CAJrXDUGNCrN5kgmrd4YK=7FtDd-LwA54aykJUP9_3sGSB42TkQ@mail.gmail.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-originating-ip: [153.88.183.148]
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Brightmail-Tracker: H4sIAAAAAAAAA+NgFjrGLMWRmVeSWpSXmKPExsUyM+Jvra7E/IeBBq239S2m77OxuLb8NavF 2n/t7A7MHuca3rN7LNhU6rFkyU+mAOYoLpuU1JzMstQifbsErowtM20KZqlUbGpsY29gXCPd xcjJISFgIvFw9Qp2CFtM4sK99WwgtpDAYUaJGfezIOxFjBIfVliD2GwCgRJb9y0AqxER0JSY PLmZFcRmFkiSeL+8hQnEFhaoklh++BjQTA6gmmqJJf3lEOV6El0Xt7KA2CwCqhKN7WvAynkF fCWezfgPVM4FtOo+u0Tj26NgRYxA93w/BVHELCAucevJfCaIOwUkluw5zwxhi0q8fPyPFcJW kmhc8gTqHj2JG1OnsEHY2hLLFr5mhlgmKHFy5hOWCYyis5CMnYWkZRaSlllIWhYwsqxiZM9N zMxJLzffxAiMi4NbfhvsYNx0X+wQozQHi5I472a9M4FCAumJJanZqakFqUXxRaU5qcWHGJk4 OKUaGM8KbxQ8dq3xjsk9P70DfhbSRvtmn5w+1e6qWkdfqORG3Vm1C69P7E9XbrvK8uOTp5PM jyexAi41EqI9t2cn3PlybuuRstutHI4LWfXWzjO6P5vvmcjrws3LrauXKHQqKJvWpXdqxrA1 XrS3O5nLo6AUekvOKvNY09VLNjYN7y7G2j3T0YuwVmIpzkg01GIuKk4EAJDjGMtZAgAA
Cc: "<rtcweb@ietf.org>" <rtcweb@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [rtcweb] Summary of Application Developers' opinions of the current WebRTC API and SDP as a control surface
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: Sat, 13 Jul 2013 18:40:32 -0000

On 7/12/13 7:32 PM, Peter Thatcher wrote:
>
>
>
> On Tue, Jul 9, 2013 at 4:26 AM, Stefan Håkansson LK
> <stefan.lk.hakansson@ericsson.com
> <mailto:stefan.lk.hakansson@ericsson.com>> wrote:
>
>     On 2013-07-09 12:18, Iñaki Baz Castillo wrote:
>      > 2013/7/9 Stefan Håkansson LK <stefan.lk.hakansson@ericsson.com
>     <mailto:stefan.lk.hakansson@ericsson.com>>:
>      >> I want to be very clear and careful on what I say. So I am
>     repeating:
>      >>
>      >> * My comment that I think Eric is right in that there is
>     consensus on
>      >> providing APIs that allow most use-cases to be met without SDP
>     mangling
>      >> is meant only in that context: SDP O/A is kept (and
>     PeerConnection more
>      >> or less as is and so on).
>      >
>      > Hi Stefan,
>      >
>      > You insist that "there is consensus on keeping SDP O/A but
>     providing a
>      > better API".
>
>     I must be expressing myself quite badly, because the message seems not
>     to get through.
>
>     * I think we have consensus on adding API that allows most use-cases to
>     be met without SDP mangling (given that SDP O/A is kept naturally)
>
>     * We discussed last year an alternative API that did not use SDP at all
>     (and did not use PeerConnection). The decision at that time was to
>     continue developing the API based on PeerConnection and SDP O/A.
>
>     Have not stated anything more than that.
>
>
> Thank you for clarifying, Stefan.  It's often very difficult for those
> of us who weren't there to understand what was consensus, and what
> wasn't, and what was decided and what was decided and what wasn't.  It
> seems that if you ask 10 people, you get 10 different answers.
>
>
> In other words, it's hard to see much consensus on what we have
> consensus on.
>
>
> So thank you for your clarifications.  It's probably not a very fun job
> for you :).   Along with that, I have two more questions for you:
>
>
> 1.  You said we have consensus on adding API that allows most use-cases
> to be met without SDP mangling.  Since that point in time has there been
> in any progress in adding such APIs?  Can you give me a rough feel for
> how much time has passed, how many proposals have been made, how many
> have been accepted, and how many have been implemented?  I think it's
> great that we'll do this "someday", but I'd like to get a feel for how
> far away "someday" is.  Thanks in advance.
>
> 2.  You said we have consensus against an alternative API.  Was that
> consensus against any additions to the API that would allow JS to bypass
> SDP, or was that a consensus against just that particular alternative
> API?  I'd like to get a feel for how many people voted for "no; let's
> not go down that specific road" vs. "no; we cannot go on any road but
> this one".   I think there's a big difference between the two.  Thanks
> again in advance.
>
>
> By the way, Ted asked us to move discussions about the API to
> public-webrtc, so should we do that now?

Yes. I will respond there (probably tomorrow).

>
>
>
>     Stefan
>
>      > Given current discussions IMHO it is clear there is not
>      > such a consensus (not at all). Or may be you are just talking about
>      > two years ago in some IETF meeting (if so I'm sorry).
>      >
>      > Please review the results in
>      >
>     https://docs.google.com/a/aliax.net/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0AuaKXw3SkHMSdHlZdV9RN0xSWFhybVl4anJLRkVPV0E#gid=1
>      >
>      >    Bad for advanced stuff: 94%
>      >    OK for 1.0: 40%
>      >
>      > IMHO such a result indicates all but "let's keep SDP O/A and
>     improve a
>      > bit the API" (I mean now, in July 2013).
>      >
>      >
>      > Best regards.
>      >
>      >
>      >
>      > --
>      > Iñaki Baz Castillo
>      > <ibc@aliax.net <mailto:ibc@aliax.net>>
>      >
>
>     _______________________________________________
>     rtcweb mailing list
>     rtcweb@ietf.org <mailto:rtcweb@ietf.org>
>     https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rtcweb
>
>