W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-webrtc@w3.org > July 2011

Re: Signaling & peerconnection API questions

From: Göran Eriksson AP <goran.ap.eriksson@ericsson.com>
Date: Wed, 20 Jul 2011 12:39:37 +0200
To: Harald Alvestrand <harald@alvestrand.no>, "public-webrtc@w3.org" <public-webrtc@w3.org>
Message-ID: <CA4B3AF9.CB03%goran.ap.eriksson@ericsson.com>


On 2011-07-19 13.20, "Harald Alvestrand" <harald@alvestrand.no> wrote:

>On 07/18/11 23:07, Ian Hickson wrote:
>> On Mon, 18 Jul 2011, Prakash wrote:
>>> Excellent. Thanks Ian. I was most concerned about interop with non
>>> browser/existing systems. If the message is not opaque, then anyone
>>> should be able to translate it if needed.
>> Indeed. Compatibility with SIP in particular was high on my mind when
>> designing this API; the intent is that it should be almost trivial to
>>do a
>> SIP gateway for this stuff. (I mean, as trivial as this stuff can get,
>> anyway...)
>>
>FWIW, this is one area where Ian and I still don't agree; I think SDP is
>a representation format we need to avoid, and that we're better off with
>a JSON-based format where the relevant information can be easily
>transformed into SDP when needed.

Just to make sure I understand- it is only the format You dislike, not the
semantics and/or the procedures as such of SDP?


>
>This is what the current Google WebRTC implementation supports.
>
>We fully agree that the format needs to be
>a) documented
>b) possible to map into SDP for gatewaying purposes
>
>               Harald
>
>
Received on Wednesday, 20 July 2011 10:40:03 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Wednesday, 20 July 2011 10:40:04 GMT