IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [rtcweb] On babies and bathwater (was Re: Summary of Application Developers' opinions of the current WebRTC API and SDP as a control surface)

Martin Thomson <martin.thomson@gmail.com> Fri, 19 July 2013 16:54 UTC

Return-Path: <martin.thomson@gmail.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 B40C621F9A26 for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 19 Jul 2013 09:54:22 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.272
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.272 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.328, BAYES_00=-2.599, NO_RELAYS=-0.001]
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 2gF1WSm0LptH for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 19 Jul 2013 09:54:21 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-wi0-x233.google.com (mail-wi0-x233.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:400c:c05::233]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C081521E80C7 for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Fri, 19 Jul 2013 09:54:18 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-wi0-f179.google.com with SMTP id hj3so30485wib.0 for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Fri, 19 Jul 2013 09:54:13 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type; bh=x84iXLIgKGdTaNOF1RzCxhMlI9O1MryPPLSEwKpHrtM=; b=e8mjCrOqFVW6BqGCC/CBxPlKPxrRycvtLHbKQv+ELHlw9fuXZgNcNXzQ1mUkl0pab4 bSyThVffxapP0lYrf/OTUrAr010+CB8GViV8AIPRhtAGgPDI8PkwLNF8j88ZyvwCgyJ5 NR48WF2kr8dB+UKnfQr2M/C6jdE20rwyCkNLw1EOMSxhlPNtWAgBP1XMOqVMCLVmdck0 iSBHjdpeayjLAGdbEiYdEw7/taiO8TL5rSeOPvPHvaDr+vAzkqPCAKq1W2yZyMBXRImM +VNeiD/2VJH0XkUfZVffTnCY8neRSktdSb3HdPtv4+Yh2gzxiVkgD7pMbDclPm1lSVrD b8SQ==
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.180.187.235 with SMTP id fv11mr12011545wic.65.1374252852544; Fri, 19 Jul 2013 09:54:12 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.194.60.46 with HTTP; Fri, 19 Jul 2013 09:54:12 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <51E96B5B.2050302@nostrum.com>
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> <CAD5OKxvGfkgRp6tXwbOu_kVteHiBBqsyR5ixH18FMKjCNGO8VQ@mail.gmail.com> <1447FA0C20ED5147A1AA0EF02890A64B1C30CD1E@ESESSMB209.ericsson.se> <BLU401-EAS386F88B3FE140492B39B59693610@phx.gbl> <AE1A6B5FD507DC4FB3C5166F3A05A484213E41E7@TK5EX14MBXC265.redmond.corp.microsoft.com> <C50FDAD5-492C-4A83-AD6D-464242FB4A05@iii.ca> <CALiegfneUj=kzDjR_E1=S-bqAajaPUE3f_A2g8oGriFyPhamPA@mail.gmail.com> <51E96B5B.2050302@nostrum.com>
Date: Fri, 19 Jul 2013 09:54:12 -0700
Message-ID: <CABkgnnXa-eTzRHcLMnHam4c+1D9kkvRwi9=V-9P43+p+pKE_sw@mail.gmail.com>
From: Martin Thomson <martin.thomson@gmail.com>
To: Adam Roach <adam@nostrum.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Cc: "<rtcweb@ietf.org>" <rtcweb@ietf.org>, "public-webrtc@w3.org" <public-webrtc@w3.org>
Subject: Re: [rtcweb] On babies and bathwater (was Re: 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: Fri, 19 Jul 2013 16:54:23 -0000

On 19 July 2013 09:37, Adam Roach <adam@nostrum.com> wrote:
> [2] For the uninitiated, "comment 22" was a shorthand developed at last
> year's TPAC for the sentiment "SDP offer/answer is hard".

No quite, it's shorthand for "there is a proposal that has been
submitted in which the problem in question does not need to be
solved", with one of two options: "either the problem has been
solved", or "the problem simply does not need to be solved (by us,
with a standard)".

I reject your thesis for one simple reason: scope.

As it turns out, "does not need to be solved" doesn't go to 100%.
Some problems are deferred to applications.  Intentionally.  Because
a) they are better at that than we are, clearly, and b) they don't
necessarily want our crappy solutions.

How long have we talked about BUNDLE?  How long do you think that it
would take someone with a functioning RTP library to build something
that multiplexes and demultiplexes RTP streams?

Negotiation is a hole.  A vast, soul-sucking, waste of time.

v2.26.15 | Report a Bug | By Email | System Status