- From: cowwoc <cowwoc@bbs.darktech.org>
- Date: Tue, 16 Jul 2013 15:00:11 -0400
- To: Martin Thomson <martin.thomson@gmail.com>
- CC: "public-media-capture@w3.org" <public-media-capture@w3.org>
On 16/07/2013 2:26 PM, Martin Thomson wrote: > On 16 July 2013 09:59, cowwoc <cowwoc@bbs.darktech.org> wrote: >> A multiparty video chat is initiated. An automated peer joins the call and >> captures all incoming video to disk in the same format that was used over >> the wire (meaning, without having to re-encode it). >> >> The specification only seems to deal with browser peers for now. How do >> you plan to address the above use-case? > The scenario you describe isn't fully specified. Does the browser > peer connect directly to the recording entity, or is the media > forwarded from an MCU? Hi Martin, I specifically omitted this part of the description because I don't think it matters. The media capturing should take place on the Auditor, regardless of the network architecture. > In either case, I believe this to be out of scope. There are groups > in the IETF who are dealing with this scenario (the siprec WG in > particular), but this is mostly just a matter for the signaling layer. I disagree. It is a common use-case (think Enterprise auditing, reviewing customer support calls, etc) that came up a lot during the WebRTC World conference. Video recording was the #1 requested feature for most developers I spoke with. We can't expect these end-users to write a custom solution that taps into the signaling layer. I propose exposing this at the API layer, not just the signaling layer. Gili
Received on Tuesday, 16 July 2013 19:00:45 UTC