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

Re: API design

From: Eric Rescorla <ekr@rtfm.com>
Date: Tue, 2 Jul 2013 18:12:18 -0700
Message-ID: <CABcZeBO5ggqov263-VhUMQ44QctMYS6Wxsa2kjYkzz4qk8jaoQ@mail.gmail.com>
To: Roman Shpount <roman@telurix.com>
Cc: Adam Roach <adam@nostrum.com>, "piranna@gmail.com" <piranna@gmail.com>, cowwoc <cowwoc@bbs.darktech.org>, public-webrtc <public-webrtc@w3.org>
On Tue, Jul 2, 2013 at 5:43 PM, Roman Shpount <roman@telurix.com> wrote:

> On Tue, Jul 2, 2013 at 8:48 AM, Eric Rescorla <ekr@rtfm.com> wrote:
>
>>
>> One clarification: Firefox and Chrome use the same DTLS stack; NSS.
>> However, I am familiar with non-browser implementations which use
>> OpenSSL's stack.
>>
>>
> I guess my to my point Chrome and Firefox share codec
>

Yes.



> and DTLS implementations.
>

Yes, but as I said, there are non-browser DTLS implementations which use
OpenSSL's
stack.



>  SDP parser, ICE, and JavaScript interface are different. So we got
> non-obvious portions of code shared and different.
>

Also the state machine.



> BTW, are you using libsrtp in your DTLS implementation or did you migrate
> to a more stable crypto?
>

Both Firefox and Chrome use libsrtp.


I'm not really following what your objection is here. The subject of this
thread
appears to be compatibility of the API, not the transport layer, and as
stated the
APIs were independently developed and in fact implemented along quite
different lines (the Ffox API is in JS and the Chrome one is in C++).

-Ekr
Received on Wednesday, 3 July 2013 01:13:26 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Monday, 23 October 2017 15:19:34 UTC