W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-webrtc@w3.org > April 2013

Re: sendonly streams in the offer

From: Stefan Håkansson LK <stefan.lk.hakansson@ericsson.com>
Date: Fri, 5 Apr 2013 07:10:35 +0200
Message-ID: <515E5CCB.7040200@ericsson.com>
To: Martin Thomson <martin.thomson@gmail.com>
CC: "public-webrtc@w3.org" <public-webrtc@w3.org>

On 04/04/2013 11:17 PM, Martin Thomson wrote:
> On 4 April 2013 04:29, Stefan Håkansson LK
> <stefan.lk.hakansson@ericsson.com> wrote:
>> Yes, in a sense it is suboptimal; but the difference is not that great (the
>> now offer adding video could go out as soon as the answer to the audio only
>> offer has been sent). And I guess we would force it on developers rather
>> than users.
>>
>> That said, this is already solved for plan B (OfferToReceiveX).
> The OfferToReceive* constraints and their implementation is orthogonal
> to the choice of Plan (A or B).  Unless we believe that there is no
> need to limit the number of inbound streams, which is the only
> available mode for Plan B in the absence of extensions like max-ssrc.
I don't really see a need why the application would limit the number of 
inbound streams (e.g. by applying some setting on the PeerConnection).

I can see a benefit of the receiving UA telling the sending UA how many 
streams it can handle, but that would depend on things like resolution, 
frame-rate, etc. and may not be that easy to express.
Received on Friday, 5 April 2013 05:11:01 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Monday, 23 October 2017 15:19:33 UTC