W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-webrtc@w3.org > January 2014

Re: Summary of "What is missing for building real services" thread

From: Stefan Håkansson LK <stefan.lk.hakansson@ericsson.com>
Date: Sun, 19 Jan 2014 07:04:14 +0000
To: Iñaki Baz Castillo <ibc@aliax.net>, Eric Rescorla <ekr@rtfm.com>
CC: cowwoc <cowwoc@bbs.darktech.org>, Alexey Aylarov <alexey@zingaya.com>, "public-webrtc@w3.org" <public-webrtc@w3.org>, Tim Panton new <thp@westhawk.co.uk>
Message-ID: <1447FA0C20ED5147A1AA0EF02890A64B1CF2EB06@ESESSMB209.ericsson.se>
On 19/01/14 00:30, Iñaki Baz Castillo wrote:
> 2014/1/19 Eric Rescorla <ekr@rtfm.com>:
>>> I'm not talking about "one library to rule all" but rather a reference
>>> implementation by one of the vendors (I used Google as an example because
>>> their implementation is already up on webrtc.org).
>> That (or the library from Firefox were we to extract it) wouldn't be
>> a "reference implementation" but merely an "implementation"
> Something is wrong in WebRTC when most of the non-browser proyects
> (opss, and even other browsers) take the Google code as "reference
> library". If the only way to get real interoperability is by using the
> same code here and there (instead on making implementations based on
> the spec) that says bad things about the whole WebRTC. Having SDP in
> the middle does not help here.

 From a standardization perspective it would be really helpful to get 
input on what is underspecified. Of course the goal of the entire effort 
is to develop specs that allow independent development of interoperable 

Received on Sunday, 19 January 2014 07:04:40 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Monday, 23 October 2017 15:19:37 UTC