Re: [rtcweb] Requesting "SDP or not SDP" debate to be re-opened
Silvia Pfeiffer <silviapfeiffer1@gmail.com> Fri, 21 June 2013 23:40 UTC
Return-Path: <silviapfeiffer1@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 B304221F9E99 for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 21 Jun 2013 16:40:38 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.599
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.000, BAYES_00=-2.599, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, 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 Iso4GD-tEuge for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 21 Jun 2013 16:40:37 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-oa0-x22b.google.com (mail-oa0-x22b.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4003:c02::22b]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 023BE21F9ED4 for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Fri, 21 Jun 2013 16:40:36 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-oa0-f43.google.com with SMTP id i7so10051082oag.16 for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Fri, 21 Jun 2013 16:40:36 -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=HbCspx7cOmed6hCUcqv/sLCUwS2GhUTWAKmBs9/Jnkw=; b=yTi38MEA/27/kVJy6Zma4o2Z7XDFgIo7KDfx0fOEoCleu/5/44S7iMRUqSfUsG63VO 1dtVpOmXgZKu9s7nO/oE/4f6qlcjlNF+qqK+rGUIWsJ4q/Vgxyjp6kyMLj7oBmW7Uk/z kJNmISiOIC4iwRcihByGG+gyojxXdVIMNh+moTMrpKhNJR9LbZJrJYs7ebyyYZ+B5jW9 sYLIngijMBAErgbOrL3cIce4052i8npTA2U6pb9PQWRiWxY+jMdq2gzX6CG8FoQvYrud z0wisbuk6JgIT3rUhFsHZPCFr6PPaSzn4PT2YFmSLK2eCShfHznQfrg8dM1NOPQwsbx6 hwwQ==
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.182.72.170 with SMTP id e10mr4454295obv.62.1371858036217; Fri, 21 Jun 2013 16:40:36 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.76.116.71 with HTTP; Fri, 21 Jun 2013 16:40:35 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.76.116.71 with HTTP; Fri, 21 Jun 2013 16:40:35 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <1371826199.49975.YahooMailNeo@web171304.mail.ir2.yahoo.com>
References: <CALiegfkajJPxWZTzjYssP91VW+StStLpxoxGCkjOLKDMUWc0rA@mail.gmail.com> <CABkgnnWfV=5xBaRqAddqUURThs9J4T4+0HK4Ux07VA51r5oC3Q@mail.gmail.com> <CAJrXDUFNGKvWHw-yqeApEdTeuqMNPTDxvdKZ2DuzANmcR2y2CQ@mail.gmail.com> <7594FB04B1934943A5C02806D1A2204B1C3AE500@ESESSMB209.ericsson.se> <CAJrXDUHCkQSLab2UuY_vWP3Gr8uh+++c9mDq5f4sCpuaK5aeLQ@mail.gmail.com> <51C1B907.8060508@hookflash.com> <CAJrXDUG06jvPvhfNwZ6Puzxj7E4XxELG_fU=S7B_c=tnC9eoNQ@mail.gmail.com> <78192824-A516-4376-8D4F-3B052ED47A0C@matthew.at> <CAJrXDUGOYc_Z_qWD7J0ZzVdfwYOacH_p5PjZEg5aP1LUetffMA@mail.gmail.com> <51C1F2E9.20405@hookflash.com> <51C1F5ED.9090308@matthew.at> <51C20FAA.4050701@hookflash.com> <CABkgnnWw9anT+h_hnF14nBChS73qpTb31hSM=p2KnGrcRPGRJA@mail.gmail.com> <51C3209B.1030501@alvestrand.no> <CALiegfkEpwxNZL8TU0ofCzRB_Gza+NoSnZpGcM=tuYBOXmHsZQ@mail.gmail.com> <51C335F9.4000900@alvestrand.no> <CALiegfk_wwvdSixFYWpBBdUNfXxmcOwCnRsjyS6J3M9WG_dJCg@mail.gmail.com> <51C38356.3020402@jitsi.org> <CALiegfm1xYpAnmrg=4vx_06RZQTo_RS2nFJoidpoQtjg2kn=Vw@mail.gmail.com> <1371807600.23131.YahooMailNeo@web171301.mail.ir2.yahoo.com> <CAJrXDUFFzAdBtQp5mS9Kfgs-N11D7SL22ms=uBg8EcHhaiB_+g@mail.gmail.com> <1371826199.49975.YahooMailNeo@web171304.mail.ir2.yahoo.com>
Date: Sat, 22 Jun 2013 09:40:35 +1000
Message-ID: <CAHp8n2m_ZZy5X1q1emAh2gSQgBQbsPy7TrefRPAZ1NEJa6tB7Q@mail.gmail.com>
From: Silvia Pfeiffer <silviapfeiffer1@gmail.com>
To: Bossiel thioriguel <bossiel@yahoo.fr>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="001a11c2f3d8ee60f204dfb296b8"
Cc: diopmamadou@doubango.org, "rtcweb@ietf.org" <rtcweb@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [rtcweb] Requesting "SDP or not SDP" debate to be re-opened
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, 21 Jun 2013 23:40:38 -0000
Did you develop a SDP manipulation library that you could share/point us to? Silvia. On 22 Jun 2013 00:50, "Bossiel thioriguel" <bossiel@yahoo.fr> wrote: > @Peter > Both audio and video. > Yes we're doing all you're listing here and even more. > > ------------------------------ > *De :* Peter Thatcher <pthatcher@google.com> > *À :* Bossiel thioriguel <bossiel@yahoo.fr> > *Cc :* diopmamadou@doubango.org; rtcweb@ietf.org > *Envoyé le :* Vendredi 21 juin 2013 16h42 > *Objet :* Re: [rtcweb] Requesting "SDP or not SDP" debate to be re-opened > > Do you work with video or just audio? > Do you work with multiple streams/tracks, both send and receive? > Do you use features such as rtx, fec, and simulcast? > Simple, single-track, audio-only clients that use SDP for signalling over > the wire are fairly well served by the current API, as are clients only > using the data channel. But doing more advanced things, such as those I > mention, require significant SDP munging which can be a very slow and > error-prone experience. > Your experience may differ from others because they are trying to do > things that require a lot more SDP munging, which can be quite painful. > On Jun 21, 2013 2:40 AM, "Bossiel thioriguel" <bossiel@yahoo.fr> wrote: > > Hello, > > I'm registered on this group since the beginning but this is my first post > on this thread. So, I presente myself: Mamadou DIOP and I'm working for > Doubango Telecom where we're building SIP endpoints, gateways, > TelePresence/Telemedicine systems... all focused on SIP/IMS/LTE/RCS-e and > open source. > > What I'm talking about is not just feeling but something I've experienced. > > Using the current WebRTC we have managed to *easily* build almost all kind > of applications: click-to-call, SIP/IMS clients, gateways to PSTN, MCUs, > Telemedicine systems...and haven't seen any major issue. It's true that > it's not natural to "hack" a blob SDP to implement features like > hold/resume, media update, early media ... but it works and there are demo > applications showing it. If there is something more beautiful we just want > to see it in action and test it. > > Many participants here have said that what they want is something close to > CU-RTC-WEB. Don't really know if they tried to build applications using it > or not but in my case I have. > My reference: > http://html5labs.interoperabilitybridges.com/prototypes/cu-rtc-web-roaming/cu-rtc-web-roaming/info > First on Windows 8 but haven't gone far as there is no documentation to > get started. Then, OSX and luckily there was a readme with two links for > testing (only one work). You need to open 3 pages (1 master, 2 slaves) and > check "send audio" on both slaves to header sound. Many javascript files > and no documentation. It's said on these blogs that interop with SIP > networks is easy but it's not my feeling ...I just want to see one :) > > I don't really understand the issue with the O/A model. SDP or not SDP > you'll always offer something and answer something. I'm I missing? > > For the current WebRTC, Google open sourced their engine, produced drafts, > a working implementation in chrome, a mailing-list to help developers, demo > applications, documentation... we just want to see the same from any > company asking to rewrite everything. > > I'm not saying the current WebRTC implementation is perfect but I have > seen my 14 year old nephew developing an audio/video chat for his homework > :) > > Regards > > ------------------------------ > *De :* Iñaki Baz Castillo <ibc@aliax.net> > *À :* Emil Ivov <emcho@jitsi.org> > *Cc :* "rtcweb@ietf.org" <rtcweb@ietf.org> > *Envoyé le :* Vendredi 21 juin 2013 1h24 > *Objet :* Re: [rtcweb] Requesting "SDP or not SDP" debate to be re-opened > > 2013/6/21 Emil Ivov <emcho@jitsi.org>: > > > > On 20.06.13, 23:49, Iñaki Baz Castillo wrote: > >> > >> In JsSIP we are getting frustrated trying to implement the "hold" / > >> "unhold" feature because it requires SDP parsing and mangling. Sending > >> a re-INVITE with a modified SDP (now with a video track enabled) seems > >> to work (after lot of pain) but we still miss a reliable API to know > >> what the new SDP means. Instead we need to parse the SDP to detect > >> global (or per m=) line attributes like "a=inactive" or "a=sendonly" > >> etc etc. It's really painful. > > > > > > I am having a problem following what you are trying to achieve here. In > > JsSIP you seem to be going for a full SIP implementation in the browser. > If > > this is true and if this WG decides to remove SDP from the API surface, > then > > you would need to completely parse SDP in the JS and then convert it into > > API calls. Similarly, when creating offers and answers you would need to > > construct SDP all by yourself. > > And we will do it very happily because then we will know what > *exactly* we are sending on-the-wire. > > > > > > So I am not sure why the SDP parsing in the current situation is so much > of > > a blocker for your use case. > > Because regardless I am a SIP-guy, I understand that the main mission > of WebRTC is to provide realtime communications *for* the WWW, and not > to enable a new interface for like-telephony-bussines. > > Today I'm doing SIP. Tomorrow I may be doing > [[put_here_a_future_RTC_protocol_not_based_on_SDP]] and then I don't > want to be constrained by decisions made today that force any future > RTC protocol to deal with SDP O/A model. > > :) > > > > >> BTW I don't know wheter you support PlanA, PlanB or NoPlan, but I did > >> a question (in this case about NoPlan) for which I got no response, > >> and honestly I would like to see it replied regardless the solution > >> uses PlanA, PlanB or NoPlan model: > >> > >> http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/rtcweb/current/msg07871.html > >> > > The other option would be indeed to do the same thing in JS. I believe > this > > is JsSIP's use case. In that case however, regardless of whether you > choose > > Plan A, Plan B, No Plan or CU-RTC-Web, you will inevitably be exposed to > a > > fair amount of complexity, parsing and JS magic. > > > > You are, after all, building a SIP stack. > > Yes, but JsSIP creates its own SIP messages to be sent in the wire, so > we have full control over *what* we create and send. Those SIP > messages are not provided by the WebRTC API. But for the SDP > component, JsSIP retreives a SDP blob string from the PC. > > > > > > > > > > > In the above mail you also say: > > > >> Another example: > >> > >> * I am a powerful SIP conference server which properly implements > >> WebRTC. I initiate a call to 5 users (running JS SIP app in their > >> browsers). The initial INVITE has SSRC/MSID fields in the SDP > >> identifying all the participants, am I right? > > > > > > No, with No Plan there are no SSRCs and MSIDs in the SDP that comes from > the > > browser. > > OK > > > >> * Later, during the conference, I call to another 6th participant and > >> enter him into the conference, so I need to send a re-INVITE to every > >> participant with a modified version of the SDP (note that this is SIP > >> protocol, so I need to use SIP messages to carry the new info about > >> SSRC/MSID and so on). > > > > > > That's the thing. You don't need that. In Jitsi we do exactly this > operation > > with no Offer/Answer signalling. RTP carries enough information to > process > > streams and we use upper layer signalling (4575) for things such as > mapping > > SSRCs to users and announcing current participant list. > > That is much better than Plan A and Plan B. > > > > BTW: What would happen in NoPlan if the remote (i.e. a SIP > gateway/endpoing) sends you a re-INVITE for "hold" purposes and you > pass the SDP to your PC? or you should not pass the SDP to your PC? > and if so, what about if the SDP contains updated ICE candidates due > to remote peer network mobility? > > > > Thanks a lot for your response. > > -- > Iñaki Baz Castillo > <ibc@aliax.net> > _______________________________________________ > rtcweb mailing list > rtcweb@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rtcweb > > > > _______________________________________________ > rtcweb mailing list > rtcweb@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rtcweb > > > > > _______________________________________________ > rtcweb mailing list > rtcweb@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rtcweb > >
- [rtcweb] Requesting "SDP or not SDP" debate to be… Iñaki Baz Castillo
- Re: [rtcweb] Requesting "SDP or not SDP" debate t… Erik Lagerway
- Re: [rtcweb] Requesting "SDP or not SDP" debate t… Robin Raymond
- Re: [rtcweb] Requesting "SDP or not SDP" debate t… Roman Shpount
- Re: [rtcweb] Requesting "SDP or not SDP" debate t… Alexandre GOUAILLARD
- Re: [rtcweb] Requesting "SDP or not SDP" debate t… Ted Hardie
- Re: [rtcweb] Requesting "SDP or not SDP" debate t… Adam Roach
- Re: [rtcweb] Requesting "SDP or not SDP" debate t… Matthew Kaufman (SKYPE)
- Re: [rtcweb] Requesting "SDP or not SDP" debate t… Iñaki Baz Castillo
- Re: [rtcweb] Requesting "SDP or not SDP" debate t… Robin Raymond
- Re: [rtcweb] Requesting "SDP or not SDP" debate t… Peter Thatcher
- Re: [rtcweb] Requesting "SDP or not SDP" debate t… Martin Thomson
- Re: [rtcweb] Requesting "SDP or not SDP" debate t… Roman Shpount
- Re: [rtcweb] Requesting "SDP or not SDP" debate t… Iñaki Baz Castillo
- Re: [rtcweb] Requesting "SDP or not SDP" debate t… Robin Raymond
- Re: [rtcweb] Requesting "SDP or not SDP" debate t… Peter Thatcher
- Re: [rtcweb] Requesting "SDP or not SDP" debate t… Christer Holmberg
- Re: [rtcweb] Requesting "SDP or not SDP" debate t… Peter Thatcher
- Re: [rtcweb] Requesting "SDP or not SDP" debate t… Christer Holmberg
- Re: [rtcweb] Requesting "SDP or not SDP" debate t… Iñaki Baz Castillo
- Re: [rtcweb] Requesting "SDP or not SDP" debate t… Christer Holmberg
- Re: [rtcweb] Requesting "SDP or not SDP" debate t… Iñaki Baz Castillo
- Re: [rtcweb] Requesting "SDP or not SDP" debate t… Robin Raymond
- Re: [rtcweb] Requesting "SDP or not SDP" debate t… Peter Thatcher
- Re: [rtcweb] Requesting "SDP or not SDP" debate t… Iñaki Baz Castillo
- Re: [rtcweb] Requesting "SDP or not SDP" debate t… Peter Thatcher
- Re: [rtcweb] Requesting "SDP or not SDP" debate t… Matthew Kaufman
- Re: [rtcweb] Requesting "SDP or not SDP" debate t… Peter Thatcher
- Re: [rtcweb] Requesting "SDP or not SDP" debate t… Peter Thatcher
- Re: [rtcweb] Requesting "SDP or not SDP" debate t… Iñaki Baz Castillo
- Re: [rtcweb] Requesting "SDP or not SDP" debate t… Iñaki Baz Castillo
- Re: [rtcweb] Requesting "SDP or not SDP" debate t… Peter Thatcher
- Re: [rtcweb] Requesting "SDP or not SDP" debate t… Iñaki Baz Castillo
- Re: [rtcweb] Requesting "SDP or not SDP" debate t… Peter Thatcher
- Re: [rtcweb] Requesting "SDP or not SDP" debate t… Iñaki Baz Castillo
- Re: [rtcweb] Requesting "SDP or not SDP" debate t… Peter Thatcher
- Re: [rtcweb] Requesting "SDP or not SDP" debate t… Iñaki Baz Castillo
- Re: [rtcweb] Requesting "SDP or not SDP" debate t… Matthew Kaufman
- Re: [rtcweb] Requesting "SDP or not SDP" debate t… Matthew Kaufman (SKYPE)
- Re: [rtcweb] Requesting "SDP or not SDP" debate t… Robin Raymond
- Re: [rtcweb] Requesting "SDP or not SDP" debate t… Matthew Kaufman (SKYPE)
- Re: [rtcweb] Requesting "SDP or not SDP" debate t… Peter Thatcher
- Re: [rtcweb] Requesting "SDP or not SDP" debate t… Matthew Kaufman
- Re: [rtcweb] Requesting "SDP or not SDP" debate t… Peter Thatcher
- Re: [rtcweb] Requesting "SDP or not SDP" debate t… Peter Thatcher
- Re: [rtcweb] Requesting "SDP or not SDP" debate t… Peter Thatcher
- Re: [rtcweb] Requesting "SDP or not SDP" debate t… Peter Thatcher
- Re: [rtcweb] Requesting "SDP or not SDP" debate t… Christer Holmberg
- Re: [rtcweb] Requesting "SDP or not SDP" debate t… Peter Thatcher
- Re: [rtcweb] Requesting "SDP or not SDP" debate t… Robin Raymond
- Re: [rtcweb] Requesting "SDP or not SDP" debate t… Martin Thomson
- Re: [rtcweb] Requesting "SDP or not SDP" debate t… Iñaki Baz Castillo
- Re: [rtcweb] Requesting "SDP or not SDP" debate t… Christer Holmberg
- [rtcweb] Priorities - Was: Requesting "SDP or not… Hutton, Andrew
- Re: [rtcweb] Requesting "SDP or not SDP" debate t… Harald Alvestrand
- Re: [rtcweb] Priorities - Was: Requesting "SDP or… Roman Shpount
- Re: [rtcweb] Priorities - Was: Requesting "SDP or… Matthew Kaufman (SKYPE)
- Re: [rtcweb] Requesting "SDP or not SDP" debate t… Iñaki Baz Castillo
- Re: [rtcweb] Priorities - Was: Requesting "SDP or… Hutton, Andrew
- Re: [rtcweb] Priorities - Was: Requesting "SDP or… Iñaki Baz Castillo
- Re: [rtcweb] Priorities - Was: Requesting "SDP or… Peter Thatcher
- Re: [rtcweb] Priorities - Was: Requesting "SDP or… Hutton, Andrew
- Re: [rtcweb] Requesting "SDP or not SDP" debate t… Harald Alvestrand
- Re: [rtcweb] Priorities - Was: Requesting "SDP or… Bernard Aboba
- Re: [rtcweb] Requesting "SDP or not SDP" debate t… Peter Thatcher
- Re: [rtcweb] Requesting "SDP or not SDP" debate t… Matthew Kaufman
- Re: [rtcweb] Priorities - Was: Requesting "SDP or… Bernard Aboba
- Re: [rtcweb] Priorities - Was: Requesting "SDP or… Richard Barnes
- Re: [rtcweb] Priorities - Was: Requesting "SDP or… Robin Raymond
- Re: [rtcweb] Requesting "SDP or not SDP" debate t… Peter Thatcher
- Re: [rtcweb] Requesting "SDP or not SDP" debate t… Matthew Kaufman
- Re: [rtcweb] Requesting "SDP or not SDP" debate t… Peter Thatcher
- Re: [rtcweb] Priorities - Was: Requesting "SDP or… Hutton, Andrew
- Re: [rtcweb] Priorities - Was: Requesting "SDP or… Parthasarathi R
- Re: [rtcweb] Priorities - Was: Requesting "SDP or… Hutton, Andrew
- Re: [rtcweb] Requesting "SDP or not SDP" debate t… Iñaki Baz Castillo
- Re: [rtcweb] Requesting "SDP or not SDP" debate t… Emil Ivov
- Re: [rtcweb] Requesting "SDP or not SDP" debate t… Iñaki Baz Castillo
- Re: [rtcweb] Requesting "SDP or not SDP" debate t… Bossiel thioriguel
- Re: [rtcweb] Requesting "SDP or not SDP" debate t… Bossiel thioriguel
- Re: [rtcweb] Requesting "SDP or not SDP" debate t… Iñaki Baz Castillo
- Re: [rtcweb] Requesting "SDP or not SDP" debate t… Hutton, Andrew
- Re: [rtcweb] Requesting "SDP or not SDP" debate t… Hutton, Andrew
- Re: [rtcweb] Requesting "SDP or not SDP" debate t… Robin Raymond
- Re: [rtcweb] Requesting "SDP or not SDP" debate t… Iñaki Baz Castillo
- Re: [rtcweb] Requesting "SDP or not SDP" debate t… Peter Thatcher
- Re: [rtcweb] Requesting "SDP or not SDP" debate t… Bossiel thioriguel
- Re: [rtcweb] Requesting "SDP or not SDP" debate t… Bossiel thioriguel
- Re: [rtcweb] Requesting "SDP or not SDP" debate t… Iñaki Baz Castillo
- Re: [rtcweb] Requesting "SDP or not SDP" debate t… Roman Shpount
- Re: [rtcweb] Requesting "SDP or not SDP" debate t… Roman Shpount
- Re: [rtcweb] Requesting "SDP or not SDP" debate t… Hutton, Andrew
- Re: [rtcweb] Requesting "SDP or not SDP" debate t… Robin Raymond
- Re: [rtcweb] Requesting "SDP or not SDP" debate t… Matthew Kaufman (SKYPE)
- Re: [rtcweb] Requesting "SDP or not SDP" debate t… Silvia Pfeiffer
- Re: [rtcweb] Requesting "SDP or not SDP" debate t… Bossiel thioriguel
- Re: [rtcweb] Requesting "SDP or not SDP" debate t… Silvia Pfeiffer
- Re: [rtcweb] Requesting "SDP or not SDP" debate t… Roman Shpount
- Re: [rtcweb] Requesting "SDP or not SDP" debate t… Roman Shpount
- Re: [rtcweb] Requesting "SDP or not SDP" debate t… Martin Thomson