Re: [rtcweb] Requiring ICE for RTC calls

Cullen Jennings <> Wed, 28 September 2011 14:40 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id CBF9821F8DA2 for <>; Wed, 28 Sep 2011 07:40:31 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -103.069
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-103.069 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.470, BAYES_00=-2.599, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id spbsqbsjYzKH for <>; Wed, 28 Sep 2011 07:40:31 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 16AA321F8DA1 for <>; Wed, 28 Sep 2011 07:40:31 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple;;; l=1419; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1317220999; x=1318430599; h=subject:mime-version:from:in-reply-to:date:cc: content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references:to; bh=wPHP/BZZTBTapSBbGlcLYmeVTww6UagAT6zrf+FXzyI=; b=iWHcfwB59nvOrggt3oj1b2l66VDlSF4hN5yfthRqzCrJQQlEK6a0acea nSMab9zyXIqVVOsuq2quXaxQVft+OP7hiOcPGw35NVzdUf/ptUEiGTTmX QCFdDK4JTnMHbj+lmnnvs7kt9+xFL38KIGpc1zYHWq9PoM8rp+NaC279R E=;
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: Av0EAFIyg06rRDoG/2dsb2JhbABBqAl4gVMBAQEBAgESASc/EAtGVwY1h1aaDwGOLI94hithBIdyi2OFIowy
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.68,456,1312156800"; d="scan'208";a="4780377"
Received: from ([]) by with ESMTP; 28 Sep 2011 14:43:19 +0000
Received: from [] ( []) by (8.14.3/8.14.3) with ESMTP id p8SEhIgN017595; Wed, 28 Sep 2011 14:43:19 GMT
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1084)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
From: Cullen Jennings <>
In-Reply-To: <BLU152-W62B7F2AC3F0D5B6E277CB993F00@phx.gbl>
Date: Wed, 28 Sep 2011 08:43:18 -0600
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <>
References: <><><><><>, <>, <> <BLU152-W62B7F2AC3F0D5B6E277CB993F00@phx.gbl>
To: Bernard Aboba <>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1084)
Subject: Re: [rtcweb] Requiring ICE for RTC calls
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: Wed, 28 Sep 2011 14:40:31 -0000

On Sep 26, 2011, at 9:44 PM, Bernard Aboba wrote:

> > And "interoperability with SIP-PSTN providers" is only relevant if you
> > are trying to turn the browser into another phone. We have enough
> > phones. What we don't have are new real-time communication experiences
> > that can only be created within this environment.
> [BA] I think you may be on to something here.  POTS lines are dropping so rapidly
> that wireline service won't even exist in some countries within a few years.  While
> PSTN interop may have been a key scenario in the early days of SIP, I have serious
> doubts as to how much attention we should pay to this in RTCWEB.  Ability to
> make a call to an E.164 number?  Probably.  Support for every potential corner
> case?  Not necessarily. 

I wish I could agree but I think we have a long, long, way to go here. I will point out that the only way Microsoft can phone Cisco is over the PSTN and that is two of the most pro VoIP companies in the world. Thought I agree with rate of land lines is dropping in some countries, the rate of  what VoIP reaches via the PSTN, which is land lines + mobile phones, is growing in every country I have stats for. Now of course, I'd love to see the PSTN replaced with something better but I think it is highly unrealistic to think that is going to happen in less than 10 years.