W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-webrtc@w3.org > April 2015

Re: ReplaceTrack and track.id (Re: ReplaceTrack - need to evaluate alternatives)

From: Harald Alvestrand <harald@alvestrand.no>
Date: Thu, 16 Apr 2015 11:10:58 +0200
Message-ID: <552F7CA2.8000904@alvestrand.no>
To: public-webrtc@w3.org
On 04/16/2015 12:19 AM, Peter Thatcher wrote:
> Well it's already there via SDP munging :).
>
> And te question isn't whether to allow the JS to choose the MID.  It's 
> whether to have two IDs/labels (MID + something else), or just one 
> (MID).  If one will work, I prefer one.

The two concepts have different lifetimes; a track can be created before 
a PeerConnection.

I like to support the model of "you are sending a track over a 
PeerConnection; it appears the same on the other side" as much as 
possible. Having an ID on the track is part of that model.

 From my perspective, MID is part of the adaptations we do in order to 
make SDP work for us.
Having rules from SDP spill over into the track model seems like 
tail-wags-dog to me.
Received on Thursday, 16 April 2015 09:11:28 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Monday, 23 October 2017 15:19:43 UTC