Re: [rtcweb] HTTP Fallback draft

[Justin Uberti <[e-mail]>]

That makes sense to me. The overall point I was driving at was that we
wouldn't have to invent new protocols, we could just propose the
sequence/logic that you describe, perhaps accompanied by real-world data
that explains the approach.


On Wed, Aug 8, 2012 at 3:08 AM, Lorenzo Miniero <[e-mail]>wrote:

> Hi Justin,
>
>
> On Tue, 7 Aug 2012 20:23:15 -0700
> Justin Uberti <[e-mail]> wrote:
>
> > My perspective is that we can make a huge impact simply by codifying the
> > rules for doing basic things like TURN over 443 (with or without TLS),
> HTTP
> > CONNECT, etc. Running RTP over HTTP could help us get closer to 100%
> > coverage, but I think we start to enter the area of diminishing returns.
> >
> > As such, I'd like to see us work towards a best practices document for
> > establishing sessions in these restricted environments; I think such a
> > document would be in scope for RTCWEB.
> >
>
>
> You're right, according to the feedback gathered on the draft so far this
> looks like a reasonable way to move on. I'm not sure a pure BCP would be
> enough, though, considering that too many documented different approaches,
> no matter how effective each, could eventually lead to a few
> interoperability issues (some browsers/relays may end up implementing some
> and not others). Maybe something in line with a BCP that at least mandates
> a certain sequence of or logic in attempts?
>
> Lorenzo
>
>
> >
> > On Tue, Aug 7, 2012 at 11:54 AM, Lorenzo Miniero <[e-mail]
> >wrote:
> >
> > > Hello Ted,
> > >
> > >
> > > On Tue, 7 Aug 2012 10:50:07 -0700
> > > Ted Hardie <[e-mail]> wrote:
> > >
> > > > On Tue, Aug 7, 2012 at 9:01 AM, Lorenzo Miniero <
> [e-mail]>
> > > wrote:
> > > > > That said, I guess there's a different question I should be asking
> to
> > > > > the chairs: since there seems to be no related item in the
> milestones,
> > > > > is such a work actually in line with what is the expected outcome
> of
> > > the
> > > > > WG? Considering the draft basically addresses a new transport for
> RTP
> > > > > and something that probably needs to be negotiated as well, I guess
> > > this
> > > > > could be seen as belonging elsewhere (AVTCORE and/or MMUSIC?).
> > > > > Nevertheless, my feeling is it belongs more here than somewhere
> else,
> > > > > especially considering we're specifying a solution that will be
> > > deployed
> > > > > in browsers and, as such, people will expect it to work wherever
> other
> > > > > web applications do.
> > > >
> > > > My take on this is that the actual work on developing the alternate
> > > > transport for RTP would have to occur elsewhere and, frankly, I think
> > > > it is a large enough task that it would likely require its own
> working
> > > > group (much as the RTP congestion control topic ended up as a BoF and
> > > > hopefully will become its own working group).  That doesn't mean that
> > > > the work couldn't be informed by the RTCWEB use cases, but I think it
> > > > would have to be done elsewhere.
> > > >
> > > > I'd personally suggest starting with a discussion with the ADs on
> > > > whether a BoF on this topic would be something they might consider.
> > > > (Note, however, that I have not talked to Cullen about this and
> Magnus
> > > > is on vacation, so this is not a "Chairs' response"; just my own
> > > > thoughts).
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > > This makes sense. I'm a bit concerned about the additional time that
> may
> > > be needed by going through the process of forming a new WG (compared to
> > > just adding a milestone to an existing WG, that is), as the final
> result
> > > may end up being available much after the original WG completed its
> works,
> > > but I see your point.
> > >
> > > I'll wait for more feedback about this and, if enough people seem
> > > interested about doing something like this, contacting the ADs and
> consider
> > > the next steps may be a good idea.
> > >
> > > Lorenzo
> > >
> > >
> > > > regards,
> > > >
> > > > Ted Hardie
> > >
> > >
> > > --
> > > Lorenzo Miniero, COB
> > >
> > > Meetecho s.r.l.
> > > Web Conferencing and Collaboration Tools
> > > http://www.meetecho.com
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > rtcweb mailing list
> > > [e-mail]
> > > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rtcweb
> > >
>
>
> --
> Lorenzo Miniero, COB
>
> Meetecho s.r.l.
> Web Conferencing and Collaboration Tools
> http://www.meetecho.com
>