- From: Hutton, Andrew <andrew.hutton@siemens-enterprise.com>
- Date: Mon, 22 Aug 2011 10:32:04 +0200
- To: Stefan Håkansson LK <stefan.lk.hakansson@ericsson.com>, "Elwell, John" <john.elwell@siemens-enterprise.com>, "rtcweb@ietf.org" <rtcweb@ietf.org>, "public-webrtc@w3.org" <public-webrtc@w3.org>
> -----Original Message----- > From: rtcweb-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:rtcweb-bounces@ietf.org] On > Behalf Of Stefan Håkansson LK > Sent: 19 August 2011 15:56 > To: Elwell, John; rtcweb@ietf.org; public-webrtc@w3.org > Subject: Re: [rtcweb] Use cases - recording and voicemail > > >However, I did suggest (in other text in my previous message) that one > possible solution might be to record locally and use a second RTC-Web > session to transmit from the local file to the >remote recorder. What I > failed to say was that in this case the local file would be a temporary > repository - just a buffer between the two sessions. > This makes sense. Also, if you look at the API proposals available, it > would be quite easy to forward (in real time) a stream being received > to another entity. There is no explicit recording, a stream being > received (via RTP) is just streamed to another entity (via a separate > RTC-Web session). I think this would solve this case. [AndyH] It might do but I assume this would limit the RTP model that could be used to the endpoint model. We are currently reviewing how the RTP model for a session recording client should look like with the AVT experts (See http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-eckel-siprec-rtp-rec-01). This might result in some requirements on how the client handles RTCP for example. > > Stefan > _______________________________________________ > rtcweb mailing list > rtcweb@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rtcweb
Received on Wednesday, 24 August 2011 12:33:44 UTC