Re: [rtcweb] Making progress on the signaling discussion (NB: Action items enclosed!)

Ted Hardie <ted.ietf@gmail.com> Wed, 05 October 2011 16:43 UTC

Return-Path: <ted.ietf@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 40D3521F8C39 for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 5 Oct 2011 09:43:05 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -3.361
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.361 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.063, BAYES_00=-2.599, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, 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 xxYsY1c4f3ng for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 5 Oct 2011 09:43:04 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-gx0-f172.google.com (mail-gx0-f172.google.com [209.85.161.172]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9557F21F8C32 for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Wed, 5 Oct 2011 09:42:57 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by ggnk3 with SMTP id k3so1077336ggn.31 for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Wed, 05 Oct 2011 09:46:04 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type; bh=qZwrzsGLtwxBNgEAQhgNn4ZECeLPdG0HrJq1/MpJgfY=; b=KlyLvt6JULiHD/sKaZ5o7j62R4v0QibyU1OL3AfIM3Xih89IGLoGwOWKM6F68b9Xa2 utBXyd0baZk4M5HoRTrviBgDMGqMh7RD1x0SWKOZ5j2XUjIax/dszZeqRt7bwwME8B2z q0mL/CtuXS+gAhleN3QMT7ARisKS5ePLmgzic=
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.236.170.197 with SMTP id p45mr14598111yhl.108.1317833164843; Wed, 05 Oct 2011 09:46:04 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.236.105.169 with HTTP; Wed, 5 Oct 2011 09:46:04 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <CALiegfnx=qoS_pqyC45WVEYEFqj-3eP9g_kyhAUaOO6He_UEfw@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CA+9kkMBi9BzDu=WOq3RG-o5nbfnUTftDg3LRBU3DFh=Kc4W5ZQ@mail.gmail.com> <CALiegfmYgQ+yb=pDp1J2_PVa1SkxTOuaUCM02Vt6-iGabwif1g@mail.gmail.com> <CA+9kkMCUTiPO3eASjn0mbRA9YCF6TMmGGOjQ4NkVkvzVMN39Gg@mail.gmail.com> <CALiegfnx=qoS_pqyC45WVEYEFqj-3eP9g_kyhAUaOO6He_UEfw@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 5 Oct 2011 09:46:04 -0700
Message-ID: <CA+9kkMCibnPLrEq1234bUMXpiKBK0+22mqwYOM__CpcO2nOayg@mail.gmail.com>
From: Ted Hardie <ted.ietf@gmail.com>
To: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?I=F1aki_Baz_Castillo?= <ibc@aliax.net>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=20cf305b10e8a9e9b704ae8ff107
Cc: rtcweb@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [rtcweb] Making progress on the signaling discussion (NB: Action items enclosed!)
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: Wed, 05 Oct 2011 16:43:05 -0000

On Wed, Oct 5, 2011 at 2:19 AM, Iñaki Baz Castillo <ibc@aliax.net>; wrote:

> 2011/10/5 Ted Hardie <ted.ietf@gmail.com>;:
> > Hi Iñaki,
> >
> > The chairs don't currently detect consensus on how signaling will be
> handled
> > for RTCWeb sessions.  We don't want to circumscribe the solution space,
> but
> > we do feel that there is a need to have concrete proposals, rather than
> > broad statements like, "it shouldn't be in the component X".  Concrete
> > proposals for how it will be handled are the best way we see to make sure
> > folks are coming to consensus on something they understand, rather than
> on
> > rhetoric.
> >
> > If you would like to make a concrete proposal for how that JavaScript
> object
> > is constructed, what it contains, and how it is shipped around, that
> would
> > be great.   Without a statement of what those details are, however, the
> > chairs worry that people will argue (for and against) proposals that have
> > not been made.
> >
> > We await your electrons with great interest!
>
>
> Hi Ted, I'll very busy next days but next week I'll try to give
> something more useful.
>
>
Sorry, but do you intend to provide a draft?  It was hard for me to parse
whether the statement above is a commitment or a statement that you don't
have time.

regards,

Ted