- From: Jan-Ivar Bruaroey via GitHub <sysbot+gh@w3.org>
- Date: Wed, 15 Jun 2022 22:46:24 +0000
- To: public-webrtc-logs@w3.org
The _"described above"_ language says: _"This specification does not allow **remotely initiated** RID renegotiation."_. Remotely initiated = remote offer. We explicitly prohibited remote offers from renegotiating RIDs in https://github.com/w3c/webrtc-pc/issues/2314. Do we have new information to revisit that decision? > it is a violation of RFC8853 for an offerer to refuse to honor a remote answer that rejects a previously negotiated RID Side-note: if you remove "previously negotiated" from that sentence then I agree, and I've filed https://github.com/w3c/webrtc-pc/issues/2743 on that. But reading [RFC8853](https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc8853.html) I find very little mention of previously negotiated state. To me it doesn't appear to make any distinction between initial O/A and renegotiation. I therefore find it hard to infer the requirements of these simulcast attributes on subsequent O/A. I know JSEP has such language, but it's not clear to me how that maps here. For instance: RFC8853's example mentions an offer to send 3 layers, with an answer to receive 2. Is a subsequent identical O/A acceptable because the net result is the same? If so, what if the answer doesn't reject the 3rd layer the second time? Now we've added a layer, is that acceptable? > it is also a violation of RFC8853 for an answerer to refuse to honor a remote offer because it removed a previously negotiated RID. Same here, if you could quote where it says that it would help. -- GitHub Notification of comment by jan-ivar Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/w3c/webrtc-pc/issues/2724#issuecomment-1157022387 using your GitHub account -- Sent via github-notify-ml as configured in https://github.com/w3c/github-notify-ml-config
Received on Wednesday, 15 June 2022 22:46:26 UTC