Re: [rtcweb] A compromise for SDES

[Roman Shpount <[e-mail]>]

On Sun, Jul 14, 2013 at 2:58 AM, Stefan Håkansson LK <
[e-mail]> wrote:

> On 7/13/13 11:02 PM, Bernard Aboba wrote:
> > Hadriel --
> >
> > I think you've brought up a critical point, which is very worth keeping
> > in mind throughout the discussions in IETF RTCWEB.  That is that WebRTC
> > is really two distinct innovations -- one, a profile of "RAI 2.0"
> > functionality, defining a core set of RTP functionality developed over
> > the last decade (e.g. end-to-end security, adaptive HD codecs, AVPF,
> > etc.), and the other, a set of Javascript APIs for Web browsers defined
> > by the W3C.IMHO,  the "RAI 2.0" aspect is likely to prove more
>  > important (and long-lived) than the W3C WEBRTC API aspect.
>
>
> I think that the Javascript APIs are going to be very important, but I
> fully agree that the "RAI 2.0" profile defined will be used beyond
> browsers. And I think that the more self contained (i.e. not dependent
> on other signaling during operation) we can make that RAI 2.0 profile
> the better.
>
>
This point, even though valid, might have unintended consequences. For
instance, if support for RTP based real time text in web browsers is
questionable, due to other ways to implement it via existing communications
channels, it should probably be part of "RAI 2.0". I think there are going
to be quite a few features, which will not be part of core webrtc
functionality which will fall into "RAI 2.0" category. Discussing these
features can slow down this group even more then it already is, and is most
likely be outside of this group charter.

Furthermore, according to the same logic, Hadriel's compromise can be
boiled down to not supporting SDES in WebRTC, with all the other language
essentially discussing things that will not controlled by WebRTC drafts and
lay outside this group charter.
_____________
Roman Shpount