- From: youennf via GitHub <sysbot+gh@w3.org>
- Date: Thu, 16 May 2024 13:54:24 +0000
- To: public-webrtc-logs@w3.org
> This way `extensionId` and `uri` could be set in a conflicting way. I was thinking mostly receiver side, in case we want to expose non registered header extensions. On sender side, I am not sure we should allow sending non negotiated ids, extensionId would be ignored. > What are the benefits of this? I see a couple of benefits: - adding an API allows to no longer differentiate UA known header extensions from custom header extensions. We can still expose non negotiated header extensions if we think that is useful (I guess ignore is probably the default option). - It would remove the need for web applications to do SDP munging. - In general, it seems less error prone, debugging might be easier, it keeps sender and receiver in sync via SDP... - web developers seem to prefer strings (like mime types) instead of ids (like payload types). - on sender side, it seems better conceptually to only be able to send header extensions that have been negotiated. -- GitHub Notification of comment by youennf Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/w3c/webrtc-rtptransport/issues/29#issuecomment-2115319411 using your GitHub account -- Sent via github-notify-ml as configured in https://github.com/w3c/github-notify-ml-config
Received on Thursday, 16 May 2024 13:54:25 UTC