Re: [rtcweb] RTCWeb default signaling protocol [was RE: About defining a signaling protocol for WebRTC (or not)]

Iñaki Baz Castillo <ibc@aliax.net> Tue, 20 September 2011 09:21 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 2F7CC21F8BDC for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 20 Sep 2011 02:21:25 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.648
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.648 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.029, BAYES_00=-2.599, FM_FORGED_GMAIL=0.622, 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 RN5QYo3nGq1d for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 20 Sep 2011 02:21:24 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-vw0-f44.google.com (mail-vw0-f44.google.com [209.85.212.44]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 96A8A21F8BC3 for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Tue, 20 Sep 2011 02:21:24 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by vws5 with SMTP id 5so548600vws.31 for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Tue, 20 Sep 2011 02:23:49 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.220.213.132 with SMTP id gw4mr141501vcb.52.1316510629562; Tue, 20 Sep 2011 02:23:49 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.220.94.200 with HTTP; Tue, 20 Sep 2011 02:23:49 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <142BBF6F-F3D5-4D04-8F65-2B1C4CF1A2A2@edvina.net>
References: <CALiegfnOCxyTo9ffQ272+ncdu5UdgrtDT-dn10BWGTZMEjZoCg@mail.gmail.com> <2E239D6FCD033C4BAF15F386A979BF510F0C93@sonusinmail02.sonusnet.com> <16880306-5B3A-4EFD-ADE4-1201138D9182@acmepacket.com> <8584590C8D7DD141AA96D01920FC6C698C896B71@gbplmail03.genband.com> <CA+9kkMAwnnKKO5+q6ey4Z0QNxax1QF21vVtw8FNsHy_rmfenjQ@mail.gmail.com> <4E76E078.5020708@jesup.org> <8548CBBD-4E12-48F3-BC59-341FF45EF22F@acmepacket.com> <4E77495E.4000409@jesup.org> <CALiegfkTdCAeEdZbXP1Y9L6i4Anjrgf1CG6ZNj35WGoHL3p_Ew@mail.gmail.com> <4E774F92.4040405@jesup.org> <8ECCEE59-E855-4EA9-92B9-543D1585B1F0@ag-projects.com> <4E778F1F.9090105@jesup.org> <CEA0AC9E-6387-4066-95DC-0D70302E80A7@ag-projects.com> <4E77C3EC.9060801@jesup.org> <CAD5OKxtciYxaVpb7b3G9yMg1A97b9dkjkOpppZcSRzS5SAO3+A@mail.gmail.com> <2E239D6FCD033C4BAF15F386A979BF510F0DD8@sonusinmail02.sonusnet.com> <C55E752E-18FD-402C-A7DE-1627813B3F6D@acmepacket.com> <4E78351C.20103@jesup.org> <E4C646E9-44E5-4EBE-9AA1-D97500FAEE66@acmepacket.com> <BB52C621-1D9E-41DD-B36B-28404740A1FE@acmepacket.com> <DA32EB0C-EDBF-45DE-A654-6CDF772DC4DC@edvina.net> <D56D6784-1700-4777-98F4-CAF9BEAF7751@acmepacket.com> <142BBF6F-F3D5-4D04-8F65-2B1C4CF1A2A2@edvina.net>
Date: Tue, 20 Sep 2011 11:23:49 +0200
Message-ID: <CALiegf=7RH-TORejwHwRoYdFn3rcWHTcpxUgD8EH=asLLDGXfw@mail.gmail.com>
From: =?UTF-8?Q?I=C3=B1aki_Baz_Castillo?= <ibc@aliax.net>
To: "Olle E. Johansson" <oej@edvina.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Cc: Randell Jesup <randell-ietf@jesup.org>, "<rtcweb@ietf.org>" <rtcweb@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [rtcweb] RTCWeb default signaling protocol [was RE: About defining a signaling protocol for WebRTC (or not)]
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: Tue, 20 Sep 2011 09:21:25 -0000

2011/9/20 Olle E. Johansson <oej@edvina.net>;:
> My opinion is that a limited version of SIP for rtcweb would not only be impossible to develop and keep in a limited scope, it would hurt the RTCweb process. And it's interesting to observe how many SIP oldtimers in this list that maintain that opinion...

I'm strongly contrary to built SIP on browsers (by the same arguments
given in various threads).



-- 
Iñaki Baz Castillo
<ibc@aliax.net>;