Re: [rtcweb] On babies and bathwater (was Re: Summary of Application Developers' opinions of the current WebRTC API and SDP as a control surface)

Roman Shpount <roman@telurix.com> Fri, 19 July 2013 17:55 UTC

Return-Path: <roman@telurix.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 D731111E8171 for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 19 Jul 2013 10:55:28 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.893
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.893 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.083, BAYES_00=-2.599, FM_FORGED_GMAIL=0.622, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, 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 aUV4q1pHtlrz for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 19 Jul 2013 10:55:23 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-we0-f173.google.com (mail-we0-f173.google.com [74.125.82.173]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D355221E80B8 for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Fri, 19 Jul 2013 10:55:07 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-we0-f173.google.com with SMTP id x54so4330096wes.32 for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Fri, 19 Jul 2013 10:55:04 -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:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type:x-gm-message-state; bh=LXTx1HWtZpY9Hb2/m7XZ0ALtElnZgvrty2Fx9T2Ory4=; b=Xj0SzC511H+XWFKwyymUYcB+AdrSrxzC2/QwWjWCZ2C137qcYBjBbMRynidjakGwxZ 3jgGZe5lhu4Jy0grtkGoWVEMCxUsbQXssr61NyqOv29XU/nseR/W5GY0N5R7Bk56uvQM pwhtmTKatMJjVy3aWU/9YeancF1/9TFpxz3ezc5IbQkAxxTrOlcGJCpFphIbZylk5vyo b5yS2EEXzqslWK0snzLoz+KLla3NFVv0SNtDs3/9PTSNUN8WcpuDew46uMkgo4ucm8YA 6UbzShtZYdLxK42EqoqTR4gPdNJAzpkoP+/hP0a8jg2/fVPeKsKBUeUXUi8W30bgIV/H 4HJg==
X-Received: by 10.180.211.233 with SMTP id nf9mr12281443wic.41.1374256504891; Fri, 19 Jul 2013 10:55:04 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-wg0-x22b.google.com (mail-wg0-x22b.google.com [2a00:1450:400c:c00::22b]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPSA id fd3sm49930726wic.10.2013.07.19.10.55.04 for <rtcweb@ietf.org> (version=TLSv1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA bits=128/128); Fri, 19 Jul 2013 10:55:04 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-wg0-f43.google.com with SMTP id z11so4249334wgg.10 for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Fri, 19 Jul 2013 10:55:02 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.180.187.235 with SMTP id fv11mr12161650wic.65.1374256502402; Fri, 19 Jul 2013 10:55:02 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.216.221.202 with HTTP; Fri, 19 Jul 2013 10:55:02 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <51E97C41.5050208@nostrum.com>
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> <CAD5OKxvGfkgRp6tXwbOu_kVteHiBBqsyR5ixH18FMKjCNGO8VQ@mail.gmail.com> <1447FA0C20ED5147A1AA0EF02890A64B1C30CD1E@ESESSMB209.ericsson.se> <BLU401-EAS386F88B3FE140492B39B59693610@phx.gbl> <AE1A6B5FD507DC4FB3C5166F3A05A484213E41E7@TK5EX14MBXC265.redmond.corp.microsoft.com> <C50FDAD5-492C-4A83-AD6D-464242FB4A05@iii.ca> <CALiegfneUj=kzDjR_E1=S-bqAajaPUE3f_A2g8oGriFyPhamPA@mail.gmail.com> <51E96B5B.2050302@nostrum.com> <CAJrXDUFtPwHNznRHYgMpSr8U04Y+toDHubJ5fK-2qtnsURtL7g@mail.gmail.com> <51E97C41.5050208@nostrum.com>
Date: Fri, 19 Jul 2013 13:55:02 -0400
Message-ID: <CAD5OKxuQO=NXZ7S-61PyT-rGgQTbqJ2wvUJcxwi=y6Lq0Q2yog@mail.gmail.com>
From: Roman Shpount <roman@telurix.com>
To: Adam Roach <adam@nostrum.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001a11c25aa0a7f79404e1e1067c
X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQnQoINsPSmapgvdi4skkBkJfBcDFLhenMZRwMh8mT2pnmegdAyBdrkEzRvvUZfW0C/fap10
Cc: "<rtcweb@ietf.org>" <rtcweb@ietf.org>, "public-webrtc@w3.org" <public-webrtc@w3.org>
Subject: Re: [rtcweb] On babies and bathwater (was Re: 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: Fri, 19 Jul 2013 17:55:29 -0000

On Fri, Jul 19, 2013 at 1:49 PM, Adam Roach <adam@nostrum.com>; wrote:

>
> These issues aren't hard because of SDP. These issues are hard because
> they're hard.
>
>
I agree that those issues are hard but with SDP they are harder. SDP
requires to create solutions that are backwards compatible within a very
restrictive framework. API allows solutions that are backwards compatible
if they are coded specific way. This is a huge difference.
_____________
Roman Shpount