[rtcweb] XSF Jingle Special Interest Group.

Ralph Meijer <ralphm@ik.nu> Mon, 22 July 2013 15:47 UTC

Return-Path: <ralphm@ik.nu>
X-Original-To: rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 401C211E8125; Mon, 22 Jul 2013 08:47:26 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.449
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.449 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.150, BAYES_00=-2.599, MIME_8BIT_HEADER=0.3]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id JMKd4+rt5zzI; Mon, 22 Jul 2013 08:47:12 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mag.ik.nu (mag.ik.nu []) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 09ECA11E80D9; Mon, 22 Jul 2013 08:47:11 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mag.ik.nu (localhost []) by mag.ik.nu (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9A748A1030; Mon, 22 Jul 2013 17:47:10 +0200 (CEST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at ik.nu
Received: from mag.ik.nu ([]) by mag.ik.nu (mag.ik.nu []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with SMTP id 2gEMjMyogze3; Mon, 22 Jul 2013 17:46:48 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from [] (s53751670.adsl.online.nl []) by mag.ik.nu (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 16F6FA100F; Mon, 22 Jul 2013 17:46:48 +0200 (CEST)
Message-ID: <51ED53E6.10400@ik.nu>
Date: Mon, 22 Jul 2013 17:46:46 +0200
From: Ralph Meijer <ralphm@ik.nu>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:17.0) Gecko/20130623 Thunderbird/17.0.7
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Iñaki Baz Castillo <ibc@aliax.net>
References: <51ED4A45.9000703@ik.nu> <CALiegfk1kUuezLSOqfLRnFC7gNWXgjerv9Q_mPKrR01zp3mdqQ@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CALiegfk1kUuezLSOqfLRnFC7gNWXgjerv9Q_mPKrR01zp3mdqQ@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Cc: stox@ietf.org, XMPP Jingle <jingle@xmpp.org>, "rtcweb@ietf.org" <rtcweb@ietf.org>, "public-webrtc@w3.org" <public-webrtc@w3.org>
Subject: [rtcweb] XSF Jingle Special Interest Group.
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: Mon, 22 Jul 2013 15:47:26 -0000

On 2013-07-22 17:14, Iñaki Baz Castillo wrote:
> Great. First thing you should complain about is the fact that current
> WebRTC specification makes unfeasible for a browser to use SDP-XML as
> defined by XEP-0167. So if you have a SIP server you will be able to
> directly connect from the browser, but if you have a Jingle server you
> will need a gateway.

Hi Iñaki,

I have been following the recent discussions for a while now, and think 
I understand the various stand points, including yours.

As I mentioned in my announcement, mapping SDP to Jingle's negotiation 
parameters is indeed one of the concerns we are going to look into. 
Philipp's work on his WebRTC plugin for Strophe.js [1], which uses 
Jingle signalling, has shown that it indeed takes quite some effort to 
map and mangle SDP to get things going. The spreadsheet questionnaire 
that Peter Thatcher asked people to fill in (thanks!) also has several 
comments to that effect. During our discussions on the Jingle mailing 
list and the meeting last week, more of such comments were made.

I want to stress, again, that Jingle's negotiation parameters should not 
be referred to as a flavor of SDP expressed in XML. This is misleading, 
as it is not managed by MMUSIC, and actually weakens your point of not 
wanting SDP as an API surface. I can understand that looking at the 
current specification could give that impression, though. The Jingle 
examples are currently interleaved by SDP examples to show the mapping, 
and we are looking into making the distinction clearer, maybe even as a 
document separate from this one.

[1] https://github.com/ESTOS/strophe.jingle

PS. Yes, I messed up the subject header of the original announcement.