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

Re: SDP wrapper? Object-oriented API?

From: cowwoc <cowwoc@bbs.darktech.org>
Date: Mon, 17 Jun 2013 11:05:25 -0400
Message-ID: <51BF25B5.4060700@bbs.darktech.org>
To: public-webrtc@w3.org
Hi Fred,

     A good first step but I'm not looking for an API that wraps all of 
WebRTC. I just want the SDP portion wrapped.

Thanks,
Gili

On 17/06/2013 8:51 AM, Frédéric Luart wrote:
>
> Hello Ken,
>
> We started to develop a WebRTC JavaScript library which is available 
> at www.apirtc.com <http://www.apirtc.com>
>
> We are experts on VoIP and one of our objectives in the development of 
> this library is to bring our expertise to Web developers and solve 
> specific VoIP issues
>
> We plan to add this “SDP manipulation” feature on our API so let us 
> know if we can help on this subject
>
> Fred
>
> *From:*Ken Smith [mailto:smithkl42@gmail.com]
> *Sent:* samedi 15 juin 2013 07:14
> *To:* cowwoc
> *Cc:* Suhas Nandakumar (snandaku); public-webrtc@w3.org
> *Subject:* Re: SDP wrapper? Object-oriented API?
>
> I would believe that SDP is a mere "implementation detail" if it 
> weren't for the fact that over on the webrtc-discuss mailing list, 
> maybe half the discussions involve how to tweak the SDP to get it to 
> interoperate with some gateway or other.
>
> It's quite plausible to me that because of backwards compatibility 
> issues, dealing with SDP directly is going to remain a critical 
> feature of getting WebRTC to work with legacy systems. But among other 
> things, that also leads me to believe that the industry has suffered a 
> collective failure of imagination. SDP is a horrible API, and 
> somebody, somewhere need to figure out a better way of getting these 
> systems to interoperate without arbitrary edits to of opaque text files.
>
> That's probably beyond the scope of WebRTC, but I'd appreciate it if 
> everyone involved in designing these API's took this as an important 
> data point. Folks like myself who want to use WebRTC but who aren't 
> experts in VOIP quite justifiably hate everything about SDP and 
> everything it stands for. It's a significant problem in desperate need 
> of a real solution.
>
> Ken
>
> On Fri, Jun 14, 2013 at 8:58 PM, cowwoc <cowwoc@bbs.darktech.org 
> <mailto:cowwoc@bbs.darktech.org>> wrote:
>
>
>     An object wrapper would be nice but it wasn't really the point I 
> was trying to make.
>
>     My point is that if SDP really is an implementation detail then 
> the specification must ensure that we can swap it out for something 
> else in the future without breaking backwards compatibility. To me, 
> that begins by specifying that the SDP argument is an opaque token. 
> WebRTC 1.0 might use SDP while WebRTC 2.0 might use some other format.
>
> Gili
>
>
>
> On 14/06/2013 11:47 PM, Suhas Nandakumar (snandaku) wrote:
>
> My 2 cents ...
>
> I personally dont feel why would one want to modify SDP frequently 
> than supporting few special cases. Also once the APIs, SDP Usages and 
> constraints are finalized, i envision there will be much lesser need 
> to modify SDP by hand.
>
> Needing to have a object wrapper is fine by not sure if it is a MUST 
> requirement.
>
>
> Cheers
> Suhas
>
> ________________________________________
> From: cowwoc [cowwoc@bbs.darktech.org <mailto:cowwoc@bbs.darktech.org>]
> Sent: Friday, June 14, 2013 6:10 PM
> To: public-webrtc@w3.org <mailto:public-webrtc@w3.org>
> Subject: Re: SDP wrapper? Object-oriented API?
>
>       +1. I understand that the spec authors are determined to stick with
> SDP and that's okay, but can we get the specification to explicitly
> state that SDP arguments are to be treated as read-only opaque tokens at
> this time? This leaves the door open to providing an object-oriented API
> for mutating SDP at some future time.
>
> Gili
>
> On 14/06/2013 3:14 PM, piranna@gmail.com <mailto:piranna@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Isn't there somewhere a wrapper for SDPs? It's crazy trying to work
> with them, and nothing have been decided yet about using a more
> object-oriented API that modify the SPD strings by hand, while it has
> been agreed several times on this list about SDPs should be
> implementation detail... Also, such wrapper should be a basis where to
> start to develop that higher-level API...
>
> --
> "Si quieres viajar alrededor del mundo y ser invitado a hablar en un
> monton de sitios diferentes, simplemente escribe un sistema operativo
> Unix."
> – Linus Tordvals, creador del sistema operativo Linux
>
>
>
> -- 
>
> Ken Smith
> Cell: 425-443-2359
> Email: smithkl42@gmail.com <mailto:smithkl42@gmail.com>
>
> Blog: http://blog.wouldbetheologian.com/
>
Received on Monday, 17 June 2013 15:06:01 UTC

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