Re: Signaling & peerconnection API questions

On 2011-07-19 13.20, "Harald Alvestrand" <harald@alvestrand.no> wrote:

>On 07/18/11 23:07, Ian Hickson wrote:
>> On Mon, 18 Jul 2011, Prakash wrote:
>>> Excellent. Thanks Ian. I was most concerned about interop with non
>>> browser/existing systems. If the message is not opaque, then anyone
>>> should be able to translate it if needed.
>> Indeed. Compatibility with SIP in particular was high on my mind when
>> designing this API; the intent is that it should be almost trivial to
>>do a
>> SIP gateway for this stuff. (I mean, as trivial as this stuff can get,
>> anyway...)
>>
>FWIW, this is one area where Ian and I still don't agree; I think SDP is
>a representation format we need to avoid, and that we're better off with
>a JSON-based format where the relevant information can be easily
>transformed into SDP when needed.

Just to make sure I understand- it is only the format You dislike, not the
semantics and/or the procedures as such of SDP?


>
>This is what the current Google WebRTC implementation supports.
>
>We fully agree that the format needs to be
>a) documented
>b) possible to map into SDP for gatewaying purposes
>
>               Harald
>
>