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

Re: Alternative to the offer/answer mechanism

From: cowwoc <cowwoc@bbs.darktech.org>
Date: Wed, 19 Jun 2013 18:22:13 -0400
Message-ID: <51C22F15.10605@bbs.darktech.org>
To: Iñaki Baz Castillo <ibc@aliax.net>
CC: Adrian Georgescu <ag@ag-projects.com>, Jesús Leganés Combarro <piranna@gmail.com>, Frédéric Luart <frederic.luart@apizee.com>, "public-webrtc@w3.org" <public-webrtc@w3.org>, Silvia Pfeiffer <silviapfeiffer1@gmail.com>
On 19/06/2013 5:56 PM, Iñaki Baz Castillo wrote:
> 2013/6/19 cowwoc <cowwoc@bbs.darktech.org>:
>>> May be you could play such a game if you don't see WebRTC as a generic
>>> SIP phone running in a browser capable of connecting to any SIP
>>> provider. That's not WebRTC.
>>>
>>> WebRTC starts when a user navigates a web, gets a WebRTC JS code
>>> (unknowingly) and the web page offers him multimedia capabilities for
>>> contacting other users (or PSTN numbers if you want). Then the JS app
>>> connects, somehow, to the same web server or a different
>>> HTTP/WebSocket server for initializating the signaling channel (if
>>> needed), and then RTP happens.
>>>
>>> Now note that the WebRTC JS code and the HTTP/WebSocket server are
>>> provided by the *same* website / domain / provider, so forget
>>> interoperability problems.
>>>
>>      I'm not in a position to answer that question, only vendors and gateway
>> providers are. If gateways are in a position to execute Javascript then this
>> might work, but I don't think you necessarily have to force Javascript on
>> them.
> But... why do you say that "gateways should execute JavaScript"??? JS
> is just executed in the browser.

     Nevermind, you're right.

Gili
Received on Wednesday, 19 June 2013 22:22:51 UTC

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