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

Re: [rtcweb] Proposed message to send to the IETF rtcweb and W3C WebRTC working groups.

From: tim panton <thp@westhawk.co.uk>
Date: Mon, 22 Jul 2013 17:29:34 +0100
Cc: Iņaki Baz Castillo <ibc@aliax.net>, Daniel-Constantin Mierla <miconda@gmail.com>, Ralph Meijer <ralphm@ik.nu>, stox <stox@ietf.org>, XMPP Jingle <jingle@xmpp.org>, "public-webrtc@w3.org" <public-webrtc@w3.org>
Message-Id: <1BCF6D21-3FC9-4E2C-A190-50B37440C48C@westhawk.co.uk>
To: Emil Ivov <emcho@jitsi.org>

On 22 Jul 2013, at 17:26, Emil Ivov <emcho@jitsi.org> wrote:

> On 22.07.13, 17:44, Iņaki Baz Castillo wrote:
>> 2013/7/22 Daniel-Constantin Mierla <miconda@gmail.com>:
>>> On 7/22/13 5:14 PM, Iņaki Baz Castillo wrote:
>>>> Great. First thing you should complain about is the fact that current
>>>> WebRTC specification makes unfeasible for a browser to use SDP-XML as
>>>> defined by XEP-0167. So if you have a SIP server you will be able to
>>>> directly connect from the browser, but if you have a Jingle server you
>>>> will need a gateway.
>>> You are obviously misinforming here. SIP is the signaling protocol and a SIP
>>> server has really little to deal with SDP -- I'm sure you know that.
>> I was talking about a SIP device also implementing WebRTC in the media
>> plane. Current WebRTC spec mandates plain-SDP usage in the wire to
>> signal your media description and transport/ICE information to the
>> peer.
> I don't think this is true. You can very well translate the SDP to Jingle in the browser and then only send XML on the wire.
> I completely agree that this would be a pain, but there is nothing that "mandates" against it.

It is a pain - but it is do-able - take a look at PhonoSDK on github.


> Emil
> -- 
> https://jitsi.org
Received on Monday, 22 July 2013 16:30:00 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 19:17:49 UTC