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

Re: Update of RTCRtpSender "doohickey" proposal

From: Stefan Håkansson LK <stefan.lk.hakansson@ericsson.com>
Date: Thu, 1 May 2014 10:17:15 +0000
To: "Cullen Jennings (fluffy)" <fluffy@cisco.com>, Martin Thomson <martin.thomson@gmail.com>
CC: Jan-Ivar Bruaroey <jib@mozilla.com>, "public-webrtc@w3.org" <public-webrtc@w3.org>, Justin Uberti <juberti@google.com>
Message-ID: <1447FA0C20ED5147A1AA0EF02890A64B1CFDC73C@ESESSMB209.ericsson.se>
On 30/04/14 22:23, Cullen Jennings (fluffy) wrote:
>
> On Apr 29, 2014, at 6:06 PM, Martin Thomson <martin.thomson@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>
>> On Apr 29, 2014 4:54 PM, "Jan-Ivar Bruaroey" <jib@mozilla.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> On 4/29/14 7:07 PM, Martin Thomson wrote:
>>>>
>>>> I was talking about clone-on-RTCPeerConneciton::addStream
>>>
>>>
>>> Forcing me, as a user, to clone my MST if, and only if, I want to add it to more than one PeerConnection seems to have little to no cost to me, and seems like a reduction in complexity.
>>
>> I might be missing something, but why do we need cloning?
>>
>
> I assumed we would get rid of cloning once we added doohickeys.

The MST is the API where we can set things like resolution, framerate, etc.

Assume you want to record the same content in two different resolutions, 
they way to do it today would be to clone the track, and apply different 
settings, and record both IIUC.

Sure, we could move the surface where you define desired framerate, 
resolution, etc. to the consumer all together - but that would be a big 
change quite late.

>
>
>
>
Received on Thursday, 1 May 2014 10:17:40 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Monday, 23 October 2017 15:19:40 UTC