- From: Cullen Jennings (fluffy) <fluffy@cisco.com>
- Date: Thu, 19 Dec 2013 16:07:40 +0000
- To: Eric Rescorla <ekr@rtfm.com>
- CC: Stefan Håkansson LK <stefan.lk.hakansson@ericsson.com>, "public-webrtc@w3.org" <public-webrtc@w3.org>
On Dec 19, 2013, at 9:00 AM, Eric Rescorla <ekr@rtfm.com> wrote: > As a worked example of this, let's start by considering track > rejection and hold. If I am on a low bandwidth link and someone offers > me video, I need to be able to reject it; it's not enough to just not > display the video, since it's still chewing up bandwidth. So, this > seems like a fairly critical feature for a minimally functional > system, and yet the chair's proposal is to defer past 1.0. How > can this work? Even worse, the WG has consensus to use 3264 Offer / Answer and this would not be that. So this just moves us backwards and proposes opening up stuff we have had finished for a long time.
Received on Thursday, 19 December 2013 16:08:16 UTC