Re: I think we need a way to configure the RTCP SSRC.

On 30.04.14, 18:04, Peter Thatcher wrote:
>
>
>
> On Wed, Apr 30, 2014 at 8:46 AM, Emil Ivov <emcho@jitsi.org
> <mailto:emcho@jitsi.org>> wrote:
>
>
>
>     On 30.04.14, 17:22, Peter Thatcher wrote:
>
>
>
>
>         On Tue, Apr 29, 2014 at 10:42 PM, Emil Ivov <emcho@jitsi.org
>         <mailto:emcho@jitsi.org>
>         <mailto:emcho@jitsi.org <mailto:emcho@jitsi.org>>> wrote:
>
>              Hey folks,
>
>              I personally don't see the need to set the SSRC (just as
>         there is no
>              need to do it for bidirectional RTP) but I do agree there
>         has to be
>              a way to obtain it from the API. We actually also need that
>         in the
>              case when we have disparate numbers of multiple senders and
>              receivers and it can no longer be assymed what SSRC is used
>         where.
>
>
>         I'm pretty sure we need it at least for the 1.0 shim.
>
>
>     Could you please explain why?
>
>
>         And I'm sure
>         there are legacy interop scenarios the JS will need to specify
>         the RTCP
>         SSRC, and letting the browser choose won't be enough.  In
>         particular,
>         I'm thinking of how it will want to correlate the RTCP SSRC of an
>         RtpReceiver with the RTP SSRC of an RtpSender.  I think letting
>         the JS
>         specify the RTCP SSRC in the RtpReceiver is the easiest way.
>
>
>     Easiest for who? From a web dev's perspective it would probably be
>     much more intuitive to say "this sender and receiver belong to the
>     same context" than "you need to extract the value of the 'four funky
>     letters' in the receiver and set it on the 'four funky letter' in
>     the sender".
>
>
> ​I really don't want to start requiring the JS to correlate RtpSenders
> and RtpReceivers into "contexts" just to work around the oddities of
> RTCP.

Generating invalid RT(C)P unless the developer intervenes doesn't really 
sound like an oddity workaround.

> "contexts" are just going to turn into complex rat holes.  For
> the normal/simple cases of using the API, I think just not setting it
> and using the default (either ssrc=1 or random) will work fine.

If both are fine, then let's just forget about the "1" value and resolve 
the whole thing. As long as you do that, then the majority of the cases 
would neither need to set nor get the SSRC.

Emil

-- 
https://jitsi.org

Received on Wednesday, 30 April 2014 16:14:40 UTC