W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-webrtc@w3.org > August 2011

RE: Use cases - recording and voicemail

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>
Message-ID: <101C6067BEC68246B0C3F6843BCCC1E31018BF62FD@MCHP058A.global-ad.net>
> -----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

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Monday, 23 October 2017 15:19:25 UTC