IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [rtcweb] Requesting "SDP or not SDP" debate to be re-opened

Peter Thatcher <pthatcher@google.com> Thu, 27 June 2013 00:03 UTC

Return-Path: <pthatcher@google.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 07FDD11E814D for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 26 Jun 2013 17:03:05 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.827
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.827 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.150, BAYES_00=-2.599, FM_FORGED_GMAIL=0.622, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, NO_RELAYS=-0.001]
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 tajDKzX2P-KH for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 26 Jun 2013 17:03:04 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-pb0-x230.google.com (mail-pb0-x230.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400e:c01::230]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 629D521F9A8F for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Wed, 26 Jun 2013 17:03:04 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-pb0-f48.google.com with SMTP id ma3so112115pbc.7 for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Wed, 26 Jun 2013 17:03:04 -0700 (PDT)
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; bh=VU77oS9qlnqqsHnamYEZWTfZTiJTAbKF3u0xXTZg+fc=; b=PV1Ou2ufJiPbjK/5Ny5XVcZOJb7RycRzRgryb8+9XnVVLXpS5FSgJvzvL9dpokIglU ncBsZ/6MGiuI25r5t35bDcrPlvLlt+ELWWCfT6QKiPEtiBRwNNihLilACfqrR444U9Yb 338EOBP5l8YDcYUJrinMFJY4N+ekSSzFSVWQU2RP55lVWq8egCr/5wAqcqv3xw+4bnK7 UxRGRWEQH+Xo2ye8qvngvwAi8NoF1S1om2aBeaH2saM6WhlbcLK+GqHzNNyw1oDZwbeT umlOr5H80dYsm0sGkymm6AO+Pjj/5thiv2qxsUrSJKMtAa9FaUFqLZUqJ7cNtwMp1GPq 5Ikw==
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:x-gm-message-state; bh=VU77oS9qlnqqsHnamYEZWTfZTiJTAbKF3u0xXTZg+fc=; b=ThVq53JFQkulnEOOOIfBjruBkmtX4GFWb3B/r4WaWKmgz3+4t1PG3zU8OpEZ/YzGYy 1/0m58yalF2bPvgRur9Rx+LAAxro7bVnL4dE4AuzShmyi2uIZ7YTNsMr+TeyunwHNN/A OB44nJni8nfl/BmiZdMS3TxjkCGqLOAR5RQs+SEsW13l/O26/vuquPzln9IiUOhpvRS1 kpyuzmtVgMSX36KBmcuEAMpsd1VZ4R3o+drCW9VojF4ZCpiIFlGYTbnX9Rr7QBkZFDzd mSczPPrD6hxjJmSpJBPhjcycUvWjp47krFcdLXpDqISrhtjTRXLfkyFxtFJ0yhIIdOWZ EMrg==
X-Received: by 10.68.238.9 with SMTP id vg9mr3161654pbc.66.1372291384097; Wed, 26 Jun 2013 17:03:04 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.66.216.163 with HTTP; Wed, 26 Jun 2013 17:02:23 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <CABkgnnV8p4c2iJuOe6FVz+cfB5qsnrMKXxnmXvop0SO1TK4BPw@mail.gmail.com>
References: <5158F0FC.3070104@jesup.org> <39821B4C400EC14DAD4DB25330A9271A02B56F@FR711WXCHMBA02.zeu.alcatel-lucent.com> <5165CF9D.6030302@jesup.org> <FC4978CB-360E-4F47-9A31-941121589E8A@ag-projects.com> <CAN2PU+4MWZQSY=VVwNpyjEnV3aHB1zLgwuRyOYiOm_nTcEL6ZQ@mail.gmail.com> <782A8339-9A9D-49AE-85E6-9FAD55436807@tokbox.com> <CAJrXDUFGj0hU1gHptFkPMCUu_idCxh8uyJ2=67g-P8a9DHD1Cw@mail.gmail.com> <CABkgnnV8p4c2iJuOe6FVz+cfB5qsnrMKXxnmXvop0SO1TK4BPw@mail.gmail.com>
From: Peter Thatcher <pthatcher@google.com>
Date: Wed, 26 Jun 2013 17:02:23 -0700
Message-ID: <CAJrXDUHfAxHhpQyyK0wpCQesiu2dPm8nGCkccit0j5XQgrmVBA@mail.gmail.com>
To: Martin Thomson <martin.thomson@gmail.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="e89a8ff1ca1a7a578e04e0177cc7"
X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQmrGUQexssVR9PUeyX4hni1Sz4RNm+s10Vvj7XRJvcOU0Ih2LstYRxBV3we/p23p4sXGMDlrHLbSbm1P75RkibSJJJ1JTCl7iAO2cPrIppR0H6/+jhzdhUJO4Wu5jUHBAcR8jWR9alDxdTE+zcjvbOYOxr8xuJcfZIUwzG2fiL8oFkMR9vud1dY8fSNzgUIayTfoQUD
Cc: "<rtcweb@ietf.org>" <rtcweb@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [rtcweb] Requesting "SDP or not SDP" debate to be re-opened
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: Thu, 27 Jun 2013 00:03:05 -0000

On Wed, Jun 26, 2013 at 4:54 PM, Martin Thomson <martin.thomson@gmail.com>wrote:

> On 26 June 2013 16:46, Peter Thatcher <pthatcher@google.com> wrote:
> > You know you're in trouble when CU-RTC-Web is considered "much more
> simple"
> > :).
>
> When you are comparing to SDP O/A, pigs start looking like princesses.
>

Nice.


>
> > how could you test such a thing, without a working implementation of
> CU-RTC-Web?
>
>
> http://html5labs.interoperabilitybridges.com/prototypes/cu-rtc-web-roaming/cu-rtc-web-roaming/info
>
> Surely that's enough to build a proof of concept application.  I'm not
> claiming that it's glamorous, far from it, there's some atrocious code
> in there, but it's not a complete vacuum.
>

I didn't realize you had that out there.  Thanks for letting me know.

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email