IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [rtcweb] Gateways

"Rauschenbach, Uwe (NSN - DE/Munich)" <uwe.rauschenbach@nsn.com> Tue, 11 November 2014 04:11 UTC

Return-Path: <uwe.rauschenbach@nsn.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 AA3321A8849 for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 10 Nov 2014 20:11:12 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -6.901
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.901 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, SPF_PASS=-0.001] 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 gLvhtIYYnzzm for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 10 Nov 2014 20:11:09 -0800 (PST)
Received: from demumfd001.nsn-inter.net (demumfd001.nsn-inter.net [93.183.12.32]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B11DE1AD44C for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Mon, 10 Nov 2014 20:10:53 -0800 (PST)
Received: from demuprx016.emea.nsn-intra.net ([10.150.129.55]) by demumfd001.nsn-inter.net (8.14.3/8.14.3) with ESMTP id sAB4AXqM014149 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK); Tue, 11 Nov 2014 04:10:34 GMT
Received: from DEMUHTC003.nsn-intra.net ([10.159.42.34]) by demuprx016.emea.nsn-intra.net (8.12.11.20060308/8.12.11) with ESMTP id sAB4AX8X008301 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=FAIL); Tue, 11 Nov 2014 05:10:33 +0100
Received: from DEMUMBX005.nsn-intra.net ([169.254.5.75]) by DEMUHTC003.nsn-intra.net ([10.159.42.34]) with mapi id 14.03.0195.001; Tue, 11 Nov 2014 05:10:33 +0100
From: "Rauschenbach, Uwe (NSN - DE/Munich)" <uwe.rauschenbach@nsn.com>
To: ext Martin Thomson <martin.thomson@gmail.com>, "rtcweb@ietf.org" <rtcweb@ietf.org>
Thread-Topic: [rtcweb] Gateways
Thread-Index: AQHP/V9fxC9yv929H0iU/MBraqxtKpxazM/g
Date: Tue, 11 Nov 2014 04:10:33 +0000
Message-ID: <56C2F665D49E0341B9DF5938005ACDF819517C2A@DEMUMBX005.nsn-intra.net>
References: <CABkgnnVyj9Wh1k3Bz3G3N0SuzsggZgg7SCUR34EEqC6LDma-ZA@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CABkgnnVyj9Wh1k3Bz3G3N0SuzsggZgg7SCUR34EEqC6LDma-ZA@mail.gmail.com>
Accept-Language: de-DE, en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-originating-ip: [10.159.42.156]
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-purgate-type: clean
X-purgate-Ad: Categorized by eleven eXpurgate (R) http://www.eleven.de
X-purgate: clean
X-purgate: This mail is considered clean (visit http://www.eleven.de for further information)
X-purgate-size: 1402
X-purgate-ID: 151667::1415679034-0000437E-5D73ADF2/0/0
Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/rtcweb/zV4m1gpMHMWt6KjMo-qPrd4Povo
Subject: Re: [rtcweb] Gateways
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: <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, 11 Nov 2014 04:11:12 -0000

Hi Martin,

In Toronto, we have discussed that we need a home for statements regarding relaxing of requirements for gateways, such as support for ICE lite. The -gateways draft provides this home; I would be OK with another home as long as the necessary text can be provided. 

On the value of this, I think we should remind developers somewhere in our documentation that WebRTC browsers / "non-browsers" should be aware that they may meet end points that have a restricted feature set and that they need to be able to interwork with them.

The statement you propose below is too short to capture the specific requirements relaxations for WebRTC gateways. 

Kind regards,
Uwe 


> -----Original Message-----
> From: rtcweb [mailto:rtcweb-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of ext Martin
> Thomson
> Sent: Monday, November 10, 2014 5:27 PM
> To: rtcweb@ietf.org
> Subject: [rtcweb] Gateways
> 
> I'm not sure that this is the comment Ted was looking for here.
> 
> I don't think that we need this document, as Keith observes, a short
> note in -overview suffices:
> 
> A gateway is a webrtc endpoint or webrtc-compatible endpoint that
> forwards stuff (media or data) to other endpoints.  This is useful.
> 
> _______________________________________________
> rtcweb mailing list
> rtcweb@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rtcweb

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email