- From: Roman Shpount <roman@telurix.com>
- Date: Mon, 17 Sep 2012 12:19:04 -0400
- To: Stefan Hakansson LK <stefan.lk.hakansson@ericsson.com>
- Cc: "public-webrtc@w3.org" <public-webrtc@w3.org>
- Message-ID: <CAD5OKxtJR=KHJ1np+xjyWempW88KtLtmxyLFYpY8zGpkrACvUA@mail.gmail.com>
I have mentioned my concern for the shortcomings of the current API in http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webrtc/2012Sep/0102.htm<http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webrtc/2012Sep/0102.html> It looks like some additional API surface is needed to address my concerns ( http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webrtc/2012Sep/0109.html ). _____________ Roman Shpount On Mon, Sep 17, 2012 at 6:35 AM, Stefan Hakansson LK < stefan.lk.hakansson@ericsson.com> wrote: > Hi all! > > As part of the preliminary plan for moving forward (was part of the mail > on poll result [7]), it was said that the WG will continue to work on the > items that have been raised as possible technical issues (in [1]). > > The chairs have made an initial attempt on sorting those items into > categories ("Will not do", "Not a question for this WG", "Being addressed", > "Needs to be addressed", "Needs further discussion", "Needs to be more > clearly described"), see below, to facilitate moving forward. > > Let us know if you think this break down makes sense or not, and any other > feedback you have! > > Stefan for the chairs. > > *Will not do* > ------------- > - *Remove SDP*: the poll was clear > > *Not a question for this WG* > ---------------------------- > - *H.264 SVC support*: IETF matter > > - *Testing of continued connection liveness*: IETF matter > > - *Interoperability with varying ICE and ICE-like agents*: IETF matter > > *Being addressed* > ----------------- > - *Learn what ICE candidates are in use*: this is part of the proposed > stats report > > - *Pausing and muting of streams*: there is already enable/disable on > tracks available [3], and there has recently been a proposal to move this > functionality to the consumer (e.g. PeerConnection) [2]. > > - *Expose additional ICE state:*, *Remove offer/answer*, *Description of > state/behavior is currently incomplete*, *Document how the different state > machines interact*: The discussion of states for PeerConnection, including > SDP exchanges, is ongoing > > - *Are MediaStreams mutable objects?*: According to [3] they are (but > there is a recent proposal that a MediaStream being received from a peer > shall not be mutable [4]) > > *Needs to be addressed* > ---------------------- > - *Rollback of offers* > > - *Provide congestion feedback API for flows*, *Bandwidth allocation*, > *Bandwidth estimation feedback* (there is a bug filed related to this [5]; > [4] proposed an API surface that might suitable; BW allocation is perhaps > mostly and IETF matter) > > *Needs further discussion* > -------------------------- > - *DTMF onTone event*: unclear if there is consensus for supporting this > feature, is currently not covered by use-case document [6]) > > - *Set Security Description*: need the discussion in IETF to finalize first > > - *Learning of network change events*: need to discuss the role of app and > the role of the UA > - *Priority allocation*: need further discussion > > - *API for discovering capabilities* (this has to some extent been > discussed in the Media Capture TF) > > *Needs to be more clearly described* > ------------------------------**------ > - *Control connection establishment based on certificate* > > - *Split SDP between PeerConnection and MediaStream* > > - *Serialization of duplicated tracks* > > - *Programmatic description of described streams* > > [1] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/**Public/public-webrtc/2012Aug/** > 0194.html<http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webrtc/2012Aug/0194.html> > [2] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/**Public/public-media-capture/** > 2012Aug/0029.html<http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-media-capture/2012Aug/0029.html> > > [3] http://dev.w3.org/2011/webrtc/**editor/getusermedia.html<http://dev.w3.org/2011/webrtc/editor/getusermedia.html> > > [4] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/**Public/public-webrtc/2012Sep/** > 0025.html<http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webrtc/2012Sep/0025.html> > > [5] https://www.w3.org/Bugs/**Public/show_bug.cgi?id=15861<https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=15861> > [6] http://datatracker.ietf.org/**doc/draft-ietf-rtcweb-use-** > cases-and-requirements/<http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-rtcweb-use-cases-and-requirements/> > [7] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/**Public/public-webrtc/2012Sep/** > 0098.html<http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webrtc/2012Sep/0098.html> > >
Received on Monday, 17 September 2012 16:19:34 UTC