IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [rtcweb] Working group last call for draft-ietf-rtcweb-audio

"Cullen Jennings (fluffy)" <fluffy@cisco.com> Sat, 19 December 2015 00:53 UTC

Return-Path: <fluffy@cisco.com>
X-Original-To: rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 39A131A0181 for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 18 Dec 2015 16:53:40 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -114.511
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-114.511 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01, USER_IN_DEF_DKIM_WL=-7.5, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] autolearn=ham
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id cwHGV1nIp4CR for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 18 Dec 2015 16:53:39 -0800 (PST)
Received: from rcdn-iport-4.cisco.com (rcdn-iport-4.cisco.com [173.37.86.75]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-SEED-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E41021A0180 for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Fri, 18 Dec 2015 16:53:38 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=@cisco.com; l=1630; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1450486418; x=1451696018; h=from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:references: in-reply-to:content-id:content-transfer-encoding: mime-version; bh=CL/K4e4Z839AEfYYKR5r6PTStypDyUFhkmd70seHADs=; b=SskSe0WVzwvpxADaBvX2TraJ3726bDhCT0CSIMKn0PdRmfpn7u95FYdS 3wdf368MFYZWBxVRWqL/eA6Kxc3uGMsjpL9Y4/qykpFgzunn2s8sfSIau llKqwI+k49F5qXxJ0gJWgkq+7AvE6IBuciWr+CW76uGAbZUo1KNyJtuFH k=;
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: A0AaAgCQqXRW/4oNJK1egzqBPwa9VwENgWOGDQIcgRk4FAEBAQEBAQGBCoQ0AQEBAwEdBhFFBQsCAQgYAgImAgICHxEVEAIEDgWIGgMKCKt4jWANhBcBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEYgQGHZIJvglOFJC+BGgEEln8Bi1GBeJVOh1oBIAEBQoQEcoQRgQgBAQE
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.20,448,1444694400"; d="scan'208";a="56856809"
Received: from alln-core-5.cisco.com ([173.36.13.138]) by rcdn-iport-4.cisco.com with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA; 19 Dec 2015 00:53:38 +0000
Received: from XCH-RTP-003.cisco.com (xch-rtp-003.cisco.com [64.101.220.143]) by alln-core-5.cisco.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id tBJ0rbXg014112 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=FAIL); Sat, 19 Dec 2015 00:53:38 GMT
Received: from xch-rtp-004.cisco.com (64.101.220.144) by XCH-RTP-003.cisco.com (64.101.220.143) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1104.5; Fri, 18 Dec 2015 19:53:37 -0500
Received: from xch-rtp-004.cisco.com ([64.101.220.144]) by XCH-RTP-004.cisco.com ([64.101.220.144]) with mapi id 15.00.1104.009; Fri, 18 Dec 2015 19:53:36 -0500
From: "Cullen Jennings (fluffy)" <fluffy@cisco.com>
To: Bernard Aboba <bernard.aboba@gmail.com>
Thread-Topic: [rtcweb] Working group last call for draft-ietf-rtcweb-audio
Thread-Index: AQHROb/f1JspZ+M0ik+ShWOkxZul4p7RfCcAgAAX0ACAADOJgIAACDMA
Date: Sat, 19 Dec 2015 00:53:36 +0000
Message-ID: <BE51388F-DACE-4693-A88B-E2B66E5E3F2E@cisco.com>
References: <CA+9kkMDAL1mKqt7cTRmU4YqX2S5QN4RKn2cfbPaBeDgx=yiN0Q@mail.gmail.com> <AE360F77-1902-412D-B5FF-6157D8D44C41@gmail.com> <56747874.2050508@nostrum.com> <64791609-0D32-4202-AAC1-4CBD053FD0A3@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <64791609-0D32-4202-AAC1-4CBD053FD0A3@gmail.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-ms-exchange-messagesentrepresentingtype: 1
x-ms-exchange-transport-fromentityheader: Hosted
x-originating-ip: [10.24.64.117]
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-ID: <103F5EB97EEC3845843CF6AE61602B99@emea.cisco.com>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64
MIME-Version: 1.0
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/rtcweb/xWTYtl5ahPq8gNtOPfZvNsWh4ro>
Cc: "rtcweb@ietf.org" <rtcweb@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [rtcweb] Working group last call for draft-ietf-rtcweb-audio
X-BeenThere: rtcweb@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
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: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/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: Sat, 19 Dec 2015 00:53:40 -0000

I’m assuming we will bring the W3C specs in line with whatever we decide here.


> On Dec 18, 2015, at 4:24 PM, Bernard Aboba <bernard.aboba@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> On Dec 18, 2015, at 16:19, Adam Roach <adam@nostrum.com> wrote:
>> 
>> I'm a little confused about where this leaves the state of play. You're proposing the the W3C spec leave it open as to whether sending an "A" through the API will work or throw an exception? 
> 
> [BA] Today this depends on whether an implementation supports sending "A" or not. As long as the audio document does not prohibit or mandate support for A-D, there may be some implementations that will recognize A-D and others that won't. The W3C API leaves it open to accommodate the options provided by the audio document.  
> 
> In the absence of a prohibition or requirement to support A-D, the best we can do is make it possible in the API for the application to discover what tones are supported, so it can adjust. RFC 4733 describes SDP that provides that information, and similar capabilities have been discussed in ORTC (though they are not currently in the spec since all existing implementations support the full range of tones).

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email