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

Iñaki Baz Castillo <ibc@aliax.net> Tue, 09 July 2013 10:18 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 27E3621F9FC3 for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 9 Jul 2013 03:18:27 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.648
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.648 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.029, 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 6+KhgvHPGtZP for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 9 Jul 2013 03:18:22 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-qc0-f173.google.com (mail-qc0-f173.google.com [209.85.216.173]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id ED28721F9F96 for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Tue, 9 Jul 2013 03:18:21 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-qc0-f173.google.com with SMTP id l10so2856977qcy.4 for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Tue, 09 Jul 2013 03:18:21 -0700 (PDT)
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:x-gm-message-state; bh=JG6oDzcXZolkdqktalvASJcKba2OoRsNZzUPIkYlVVs=; b=Xg50X3hDvJ8svGglmLsMQ2kJkowvWB0fA2vT0qXfhyXXI2ltDvA40X31SZ3X7euxww TLBpULnUOrU+1t5PfbMGP6SK8R61tGJELgqI+DrYULlrMdQOgJbH3nzL4ed6s2ELIm4j VndoRfh65NFhKMAOsVpSoMExs5b7USQ/gL1xXzuB1gwro22Yj5+ERvSNPUPV+LOTQfcT k61+AePHPmWMsDJw9O4gZhUoBHN5rPsqCns8lM6hEFw4hkP67/1g4GHWQbajvLzFKnHD jg3DvcDXu8Cos3HYdyEt+6cWjIQ+AujES00KRve9zp5bfC513Jt8mKhUO2cVMr82XqE9 TJgA==
X-Received: by 10.49.61.167 with SMTP id q7mr19879948qer.80.1373365101037; Tue, 09 Jul 2013 03:18:21 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.49.72.132 with HTTP; Tue, 9 Jul 2013 03:18:00 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <1447FA0C20ED5147A1AA0EF02890A64B1C30CF49@ESESSMB209.ericsson.se>
References: <CAJrXDUGMohpBdi-ft-o_uE7ewFkw7wRY9x7gYEncjov7qi-Bew@mail.gmail.com> <CABcZeBPa4wBS8pYq=0wesMOfL6TkeC7QGAZ8pWwOcnkhkJqWfA@mail.gmail.com> <CAJrXDUFxo8P8wxh8jX3019yPQOuwQ0eVdsFmRXsbWdWinnc5oA@mail.gmail.com> <CABcZeBOTKpmFC34waqZ4kA-P8t+E6yY9gX1JFCHhsBH0+CF-Qw@mail.gmail.com> <1447FA0C20ED5147A1AA0EF02890A64B1C30BC0F@ESESSMB209.ericsson.se> <CAD5OKxtKLMf_d=8GSMrqfNhDHPe9MFP2ZTKzZHFn9CyMr-gSVQ@mail.gmail.com> <1447FA0C20ED5147A1AA0EF02890A64B1C30C833@ESESSMB209.ericsson.se> <CAJrXDUHOZf21aXgQMrdjTV8Fok+fVp-2SuhTra0JGy0Jq=Wi0Q@mail.gmail.com> <CAHp8n2mNdNiXCCNUdEvKgAsh_pPn=jNs+56VCg4PMKbUmOGztQ@mail.gmail.com> <CABkgnnUZMAuDocwZWXn9a+Xj3kkcX0uyRgjDmy-hQxpTDKWj3w@mail.gmail.com> <1447FA0C20ED5147A1AA0EF02890A64B1C30CF49@ESESSMB209.ericsson.se>
From: =?UTF-8?Q?I=C3=B1aki_Baz_Castillo?= <ibc@aliax.net>
Date: Tue, 9 Jul 2013 12:18:00 +0200
Message-ID: <CALiegfmiRsOXL97XDzMRQ_Vvbk9zaDBBvCPxr_=zbDJbnMZ_8A@mail.gmail.com>
To: =?UTF-8?Q?Stefan_H=C3=A5kansson_LK?= <stefan.lk.hakansson@ericsson.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQl6fuLJkf4JMgWaYKG8f6RMr48wCO01yo+bgl/ySgASXFeVZPvpjQHt9501haGcsYjkNl/Y
Cc: "<rtcweb@ietf.org>" <rtcweb@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [rtcweb] Summary of Application Developers' opinions of the current WebRTC API and SDP as a control surface
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: Tue, 09 Jul 2013 10:18:27 -0000

2013/7/9 Stefan Håkansson LK <stefan.lk.hakansson@ericsson.com>;:
> 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).

Hi Stefan,

You insist that "there is consensus on keeping SDP O/A but providing a
better API". Given current discussions IMHO it is clear there is not
such a consensus (not at all). Or may be you are just talking about
two years ago in some IETF meeting (if so I'm sorry).

Please review the results in
https://docs.google.com/a/aliax.net/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0AuaKXw3SkHMSdHlZdV9RN0xSWFhybVl4anJLRkVPV0E#gid=1

  Bad for advanced stuff: 94%
  OK for 1.0: 40%

IMHO such a result indicates all but "let's keep SDP O/A and improve a
bit the API" (I mean now, in July 2013).


Best regards.



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