Re: Proposal: offerDataChannel in RTCOfferOptions

On Tue, Apr 28, 2015 at 9:51 AM, Jan-Ivar Bruaroey <jib@mozilla.com> wrote:

>  On 4/28/15 12:35 PM, Peter Thatcher wrote:
>
>
>  If the suggestion were to have a data channel created by default, with
>> an option instead to suppress that behaviour; *that( I might be able
>> to understand.
>>
>>
>  ​I'd be even more happy if "offerDataChannel" were true by default, just
> like "offerToReceiveAudio" is. ​
>
>
> Where does it say that offerToReceiveAudio defaults to true (nevermind
> that it is a number now)
> ​?
>

Sorry, I was (mis)remembering what it was like before we changed it to a
number.  But I'd still be happy with data channels defaulting to true.
 ​  ​

> Also, shouldn't it be offer*ToReceive*DataChannel?
>

​Since data channels aren't unidirectional, offering to receive data
channels sounds kind of weird.
​


>
> I thought the idea here was:
>
>   offerer: "I don't have a datachannel but I don't mind if you do."
>   answerer: "I do have a datachannel for you, thanks for asking!"
>

​I think it's more like:

offerer: "I'd like to setup the transport necessary for creating data
channels"
answerer: "Great, let's setup the transport necessary for ​creating data
channels"

or​

offerer: "I'd like to setup the transport necessary for creating data
channels"
answerer: "I don't know what you're talking about.  Let's do audio only"
​


> That, or the (near) symmetry may be confusing me about what we're solving.
>
> .: Jan-Ivar :.
>
>