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

Stefan Håkansson LK <> Tue, 09 July 2013 07:40 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3AA9821F9A92 for <>; Tue, 9 Jul 2013 00:40:38 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -5.342
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.342 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.607, BAYES_00=-2.599, HELO_EQ_SE=0.35, MIME_8BIT_HEADER=0.3, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4]
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id cgs9EJzZptoI for <>; Tue, 9 Jul 2013 00:40:33 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 46EAA21F91B4 for <>; Tue, 9 Jul 2013 00:40:31 -0700 (PDT)
X-AuditID: c1b4fb25-b7f826d000001766-a9-51dbbe6ee970
Received: from (Unknown_Domain []) by (Symantec Mail Security) with SMTP id F3.00.05990.E6EBBD15; Tue, 9 Jul 2013 09:40:30 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from ([]) by ([]) with mapi id 14.02.0328.009; Tue, 9 Jul 2013 09:40:30 +0200
From: Stefan Håkansson LK <>
To: Martin Thomson <>
Thread-Topic: [rtcweb] Summary of Application Developers' opinions of the current WebRTC API and SDP as a control surface
Thread-Index: AQHOeDFbTNRhHYI3NkSZeqhrbqmeQg==
Date: Tue, 09 Jul 2013 07:40:29 +0000
Message-ID: <>
References: <> <> <> <> <> <> <> <> <> <>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
x-originating-ip: []
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Brightmail-Tracker: H4sIAAAAAAAAA+NgFjrCLMWRmVeSWpSXmKPExsUyM+JvrW7evtuBBvevyFlcO/OP0WLtv3Z2 i5W3LrA4MHvsnHWX3WPJkp9MAUxRXDYpqTmZZalF+nYJXBmzP/QzFhzirZg+N7qB8S9XFyMn h4SAiUTDqxNMELaYxIV769m6GLk4hAQOM0rMnNjDBpIQEljIKDH1cC6IzSYQKLF13wKwuIiA rsSisw/YQWxmgQiJlglbWUBsYYEqieWHjwHFOYBqqiWW9JdDlOtJdF2EKGERUAHatYQVxOYV 8JU4/X8tC8Tek6wSj/fPZAZJMAId9P3UGiaI+eISt57MhzpUQGLJnvPMELaoxMvH/1ghbCWJ HxsusUDU60ncmDqFDcLWlli28DUzxDJBiZMzn7BMYBSdhWTsLCQts5C0zELSsoCRZRUje25i Zk56udEmRmBMHNzyW3UH451zIocYpTlYlMR5N+udCRQSSE8sSc1OTS1ILYovKs1JLT7EyMTB KdXAuKu87JTRrFePlRNy3crCjs6Wm7Rx1oLSjZ+rzpWe+X3daEFn5JPbadwOD1Vlb8l85nw7 0TE0NU5g6eovgU/ShN3OTHvse8/o9+k7bgt+chlGNrobT/Yo5XOZpSsgcGe+uXz05wVxaerv bjMpPkpc79bPKb/eQEIm0Y7JseK6Vmvpl+9/18aUK7EUZyQaajEXFScCAGqZQE5XAgAA
Cc: "<>" <>
Subject: Re: [rtcweb] Summary of Application Developers' opinions of the current WebRTC API and SDP as a control surface
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: Real-Time Communication in WEB-browsers working group list <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 09 Jul 2013 07:40:38 -0000

On 7/9/13 5:44 AM, Martin Thomson wrote:
> On 8 July 2013 20:03, Silvia Pfeiffer <> wrote:
>> Or they didn't understand the consequences yet.... Also, it's
>> easy to object on a mailing list, while in a meeting room, you'd have
>> to provide an alternative and it's really hard to come up with such an
>> alternative IMHO.
> Hey Silvia,
> We were there, in person, in Lyon, last November, but there were just
> two of us.  We even had a viable alternative.

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).

I don't think Martin or anyone else objected to this in Lyon or at any 
other discussion.

It is also true that an alternative API proposal, CU-rtcweb, was brought 
forward to the WebRTC WG earlier during 2012. The WG took this under 
consideration, and (at that time) decided to continue developing based 
on the PeerConnection API including SDP O/A.

I think the discussion in Lyon only evolved around PeerConnection (wiht 
SDP O/A), we did not discuss other API alternatives.

> It's easy to dismiss two people.  Almost as easy, if not even easier,
> to dismiss an absent mass.
> _______________________________________________
> rtcweb mailing list