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

Re: The main issue with SDP - Was: Initial notes on MS proposal

From: Martin Thomson <martin.thomson@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 28 Aug 2012 15:38:03 -0700
Message-ID: <CABkgnnXVQ7R6iOxs2tCMUaxkRTpyM+vSwi1RChkiVg3g9H1jxw@mail.gmail.com>
To: Harald Alvestrand <harald@alvestrand.no>
Cc: Markus.Isomaki@nokia.com, matthew.kaufman@skype.net, ekr@rtfm.com, public-webrtc@w3.org
On 28 August 2012 12:44, Harald Alvestrand <harald@alvestrand.no> wrote:
> We know that some browser will want to implement extensions. Not permitting
> them to do so would land us in the "can't evolve" situation that we don't
> want to be in.

What we need is a clearly delineated and documented set of things that
are possible.  That set of things might also include some of the
things that are impossible.  That set of possible things includes
extension.  As it turns out, extension is a hard problem to solve.

At the moment, there is nothing.  That includes the MS proposal.  I
assume that others are assuming that SDP extension mechanisms are
adequate.  That might need to be re-examined.  I understand that the
SDP extension mechanisms are constrained.

> So we have to define a minimum profile that all browsers will support, just
> like we do for codecs, and then use the extension rules that are defined for
> SDP to allow further extensions that don't cause harm.
>
> Not saying it's trivial, but it's relatively clear what has to be done.

:)

--Martin
Received on Tuesday, 28 August 2012 22:38:31 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 28 August 2012 22:38:33 GMT