IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [rtcweb] A plea for simplicity, marketability - and... who are we designing RTCWEB for?

Iñaki Baz Castillo <ibc@aliax.net> Mon, 24 October 2011 14:20 UTC

Return-Path: <ibc@aliax.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 14C6621F8B7D for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 24 Oct 2011 07:20:51 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.636
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.636 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.041, BAYES_00=-2.599, FM_FORGED_GMAIL=0.622, MIME_8BIT_HEADER=0.3, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1]
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 k9zdLrrci0wi for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 24 Oct 2011 07:20:50 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-vx0-f172.google.com (mail-vx0-f172.google.com [209.85.220.172]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6539921F84D4 for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Mon, 24 Oct 2011 07:20:50 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by vcbfo1 with SMTP id fo1so5893233vcb.31 for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Mon, 24 Oct 2011 07:20:49 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.220.193.67 with SMTP id dt3mr1760598vcb.61.1319466049670; Mon, 24 Oct 2011 07:20:49 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.220.118.143 with HTTP; Mon, 24 Oct 2011 07:20:49 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <CAAJUQMg96qw5DhNMSdCEUCtM7RoDHxvAWXAoBgGA6CM4D9M00A@mail.gmail.com>
References: <9C8CA816-65FB-41A0-999C-4C43128CAAB4@danyork.org> <2E239D6FCD033C4BAF15F386A979BF51159B91@sonusinmail02.sonusnet.com> <CAAJUQMjHOJxCUGTwON9PmK-QEN0jM++RTWuRpmsHS-eszcNkXQ@mail.gmail.com> <4EA1B9E5.8030507@jesup.org> <CAAJUQMiWTZK8XQXcm-FS+BdbjJcTtgYeYcO6k2O7LZUY8R_3Kw@mail.gmail.com> <CALiegfnQ2xn16gvKtuuJv6Ls0nTj8iHugWd7CS2ocBsn-vgf_g@mail.gmail.com> <CAAJUQMg96qw5DhNMSdCEUCtM7RoDHxvAWXAoBgGA6CM4D9M00A@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 24 Oct 2011 16:20:49 +0200
Message-ID: <CALiegfmk5d9QWvhso7hnpbkdLh-aDzcggGi=J78X-j695YEFeg@mail.gmail.com>
From: Iñaki Baz Castillo <ibc@aliax.net>
To: Wolfgang Beck <wolfgang.beck01@googlemail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Cc: Randell Jesup <randell-ietf@jesup.org>, rtcweb@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [rtcweb] A plea for simplicity, marketability - and... who are we designing RTCWEB for?
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, 24 Oct 2011 14:20:51 -0000

2011/10/24 Wolfgang Beck <wolfgang.beck01@googlemail.com>:
> If a caller decides to suppress her caller ID, you'll
> just see that someone unknown called.

Why are you assuming that a RTCweb call has always a caller ID?

Imagine a web game. A visitor enters the web and automatically
receives an audio "call" from the website. The user is prompted
"website mygame.com is attempting to establish an audio call with you,
do you accept?". The user presses OK and is entered into a multiconf
with all the web users. There is NO need at all for having a
"caller-id" in this kind of call. Again I insist that RTC-Web should
not be designed *just* to cover the use cases of current VoIP
protocols.

-- 
Iñaki Baz Castillo
<ibc@aliax.net>

v2.28.0 | Report a Bug | By Email | System Status