Re: [rtcweb] Comment on draft-jennings-rtcweb-signaling-01

Iñaki Baz Castillo <ibc@aliax.net> Fri, 11 November 2011 16:22 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 94F0221F8A7B for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 11 Nov 2011 08:22:27 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.637
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.637 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.039, BAYES_00=-2.599, FM_FORGED_GMAIL=0.622, 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 FI48ZwN-SGpV for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 11 Nov 2011 08:22:27 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-vx0-f172.google.com (mail-vx0-f172.google.com [209.85.220.172]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0ACD321F8A35 for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Fri, 11 Nov 2011 08:22:26 -0800 (PST)
Received: by vcbfk1 with SMTP id fk1so4130219vcb.31 for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Fri, 11 Nov 2011 08:22:26 -0800 (PST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.52.94.18 with SMTP id cy18mr22078301vdb.24.1321028546132; Fri, 11 Nov 2011 08:22:26 -0800 (PST)
Received: by 10.220.107.206 with HTTP; Fri, 11 Nov 2011 08:22:26 -0800 (PST)
Received: by 10.220.107.206 with HTTP; Fri, 11 Nov 2011 08:22:26 -0800 (PST)
In-Reply-To: <387F9047F55E8C42850AD6B3A7A03C6C01CE7093@inba-mail01.sonusnet.com>
References: <387F9047F55E8C42850AD6B3A7A03C6C01CE7093@inba-mail01.sonusnet.com>
Date: Fri, 11 Nov 2011 17:22:26 +0100
Message-ID: <CALiegfmQgXAnm6JR4AH+47_z+UmmTtp4QSZKPyJq+GatwAaFuQ@mail.gmail.com>
From: =?UTF-8?Q?I=C3=B1aki_Baz_Castillo?= <ibc@aliax.net>
To: "Ravindran, Parthasarathi" <pravindran@sonusnet.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=20cf307cff763afce004b177ed8c
Cc: "&lt,rtcweb@ietf.org&gt," <rtcweb@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [rtcweb] Comment on draft-jennings-rtcweb-signaling-01
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: Fri, 11 Nov 2011 16:22:27 -0000

It is explained in some mails. That just means that ROAP JSON objects can
be sent verbatim in the wire as part of the media protocol. But nobody
mandates that.

Also remeber that ROAP is just about media information. It is not a call
control/signaling protocol (which is also free per website has the recent
consensus in this WG stated).

Regards.
El 11/11/2011 06:21, "Ravindran, Parthasarathi" <pravindran@sonusnet.com>
escribió:

> Cullen,
>
> On the last RTCWeb call (
> http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/rtcweb/current/msg02260.html), you
> have mentioned that " I will clarify ROAP is over-the-wire protocol" as per
> note but it does not reflect in draft-jennings-rtcweb-signaling-01. Could
> you please let me know the reason for this change.
>
> Thanks
> Partha
> _______________________________________________
> rtcweb mailing list
> rtcweb@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rtcweb
>