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

Re: On babies and bathwater (was Re: [rtcweb] Summary of Application Developers' opinions of the current WebRTC API and SDP as a control surface)

From: Iñaki Baz Castillo <ibc@aliax.net>
Date: Mon, 29 Jul 2013 17:02:26 +0200
Message-ID: <CALiegfmmfy3c_tp4cGQpegJOg8v-J_4aqXoKzrNtg6z-DP1HGA@mail.gmail.com>
To: Cullen Jennings <fluffy@iii.ca>
Cc: Martin Thomson <martin.thomson@gmail.com>, "public-webrtc@w3.org" <public-webrtc@w3.org>
>> On 25 July 2013 11:02, Cullen Jennings <fluffy@iii.ca> wrote:
>>> Very few service providers also manufacture video conferring servers. So if you consider a video conferencing service, they are probably getting the video MCU from a different place than who developed the web service.
>>
>> That's not an argument that has any bearing on the interactions
>> between the web service and the browser (i.e., the API).  That just
>> says that the web service and MCU had best have a well-defined
>> protocol that describes their interactions.
>
> The question I was asked if they same Service Provider created both of them and the answer to that is often no.


Define the wire protocol for that, which is SIP+SDP+Plan-Unified. Let
MMUSIC do that. And let JS developers to build JS libraries that
create and manage such a SDP while internally use a real JS Object
based API for WebRTC.

Let all be happy, not just the gateway manufacturers.


-- 
Iñaki Baz Castillo
<ibc@aliax.net>
Received on Monday, 29 July 2013 15:03:17 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Monday, 23 October 2017 15:19:35 UTC