W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-webrtc@w3.org > August 2012

Do we need two ways of identifying m-lines?

From: Eric Rescorla <ekr@rtfm.com>
Date: Sun, 19 Aug 2012 08:46:11 -0700
Message-ID: <CABcZeBOysorrKYbW5D5x_5TbUwnuoM3NkOA-5Hy-QjkiPmOR0A@mail.gmail.com>
To: public-webrtc@w3.org
The current RTCIceCandidate type has two ways of identifying the m-line,
an m-line index (sdpMLineIndex) and an sdpMid, corresponding
to the RFC 3388 media stream identification value.

http://dev.w3.org/2011/webrtc/editor/webrtc.html#rtcicecandidate-type

[Constructor (optional RTCIceCandidateInit candidateInitDict)]
interface RTCIceCandidate {
             attribute DOMString?      candidate;
             attribute DOMString?      sdpMid;
             attribute unsigned short? sdpMLineIndex;
    stringifier DOMString ();
};
dictionary RTCIceCandidateInit {
    DOMString      candidate;
    DOMString      sdpMid;
    unsigned short sdpMLineIndex;
};

Is there a reason why it makes sense to have two of these? Since the
receiver of the candidate has no way of indicating which versions
they support, that means you need to support both, and translating
between them in the JS is going to be a pain in the ass. Also, it's
just another way for there to be disagreement (what happens if they
don't refer to the same m-line.)

ISTM to me that it would make more sense to pick just one
of these (probably sdpMLineIndex) and stick with it.

-Ekr
Received on Sunday, 19 August 2012 15:47:25 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Sunday, 19 August 2012 15:47:26 GMT