IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [rtcweb] JSEP-02 Comments

Matthew Kaufman <matthew.kaufman@skype.net> Wed, 31 October 2012 10:58 UTC

Return-Path: <matthew.kaufman@skype.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 B7CD321F867D for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 31 Oct 2012 03:58:35 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.919
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.919 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.380, BAYES_00=-2.599, MIME_8BIT_HEADER=0.3]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id q2B05bF7-j19 for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 31 Oct 2012 03:58:35 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from NA01-BY2-obe.outbound.protection.outlook.com (na01-by2-obe.ptr.protection.outlook.com [207.46.100.24]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 423ED21F865E for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Wed, 31 Oct 2012 03:58:35 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from BL2FFO11FD007.protection.gbl (10.173.161.202) by BL2FFO11HUB037.protection.gbl (10.173.160.241) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.545.8; Wed, 31 Oct 2012 10:58:27 +0000
Received: from TK5EX14HUBC104.redmond.corp.microsoft.com (131.107.125.37) by BL2FFO11FD007.mail.protection.outlook.com (10.173.161.3) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.545.8 via Frontend Transport; Wed, 31 Oct 2012 10:58:26 +0000
Received: from TK5EX14MBXC272.redmond.corp.microsoft.com ([169.254.2.52]) by TK5EX14HUBC104.redmond.corp.microsoft.com ([157.54.80.25]) with mapi id 14.02.0318.003; Wed, 31 Oct 2012 10:58:03 +0000
From: Matthew Kaufman <matthew.kaufman@skype.net>
To: Iñaki Baz Castillo <ibc@aliax.net>, Christer Holmberg <christer.holmberg@ericsson.com>
Thread-Topic: [rtcweb] JSEP-02 Comments
Thread-Index: Ac2yt7t/ZNifzsQLTfGdplUZjCzVaAAdWHOAAKl9f4AAPfPBAAABBfcAAADu3YAAIGxlAAAAcEhg
Date: Wed, 31 Oct 2012 10:58:02 +0000
Message-ID: <AE1A6B5FD507DC4FB3C5166F3A05A484160FDCE8@tk5ex14mbxc272.redmond.corp.microsoft.com>
References: <7594FB04B1934943A5C02806D1A2204B01E60F@ESESSMB209.ericsson.se> <C5E08FE080ACFD4DAE31E4BDBF944EB1118A4893@xmb-aln-x02.cisco.com> <7594FB04B1934943A5C02806D1A2204B0206F0@ESESSMB209.ericsson.se> <006401cdb6ca$e6102840$b23078c0$@co.in> <BLU169-DS20217F296E86E29521639293620@phx.gbl> <7594FB04B1934943A5C02806D1A2204B021AA4@ESESSMB209.ericsson.se> <CALiegf=xmfP8SBihDFdwn5YRXe=qw2Ck+vr9S6e5tQfJjGZMgg@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CALiegf=xmfP8SBihDFdwn5YRXe=qw2Ck+vr9S6e5tQfJjGZMgg@mail.gmail.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-originating-ip: [157.54.51.35]
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Forefront-Antispam-Report: CIP:131.107.125.37; CTRY:US; IPV:CAL; IPV:NLI; EFV:NLI; SFV:NSPM; SFS:(51704002)(74662001)(47446002)(16406001)(46102001)(48376001)(74502001)(47736001)(31966008)(33656001)(50466001)(54356001)(53806001)(44976002)(51856001)(47776002)(5343655001)(4396001)(47976001)(54316001)(49866001)(50986001); DIR:OUT; LANG:en;
X-OriginatorOrg: microsoft.onmicrosoft.com
X-Forefront-PRVS: 06515DA04B
Cc: "rtcweb@ietf.org" <rtcweb@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [rtcweb] JSEP-02 Comments
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: Wed, 31 Oct 2012 10:58:35 -0000

> From: rtcweb-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:rtcweb-bounces@ietf.org] On
> Behalf Of Iñaki Baz Castillo
>
> So IMHO PRANSWER looks like a hack introduced by SIP guys into WebRTC,
> regardless it makes no sense at all in the WWW world.

Well, since using SDP Offer/Answer as the API is a "hack introduced by SIP guys into WebRTC", I'm not at all surprised to see requirements for things like PRANSWER showing up.

Next you're going to wonder why a single RTCPeerConnection object represents open ICE sessions with RTP media flowing between this browser and *any number* of remote peers.

Matthew Kaufman

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email