Re: Summary of replace track status

On 29/05/15 18:17, Martin Thomson wrote:
> On 29 May 2015 at 05:55, Stefan Håkansson LK
> <stefan.lk.hakansson@ericsson.com> wrote:
>> I think you are right, and it also seems (based on feedback from others)
>> that replaceTrack should work even if a renegotiation is required.
>
> That's not what I got from Cullen's comment.  His point was that
> replacing should work from any state.  Your statement here leads me to
> infer that replaceTrack can cause renegotiation.  That's what
> addTrack/removeTrack are for.

I did not get that from Cullen's comment either. I got that from 
Harald's [1], Ekr's [2] and Jan-Ivar's [3] (but I'm not sure I interpret 
this one correct) comments (it is also how Jan-Ivar's PR [4] is designed 
if IIUC).

OTOH, Peter [5] and Jan-Ivar in another message [6] said that 
replaceTrack should never lead to renegotiation (but instead fail), so 
it is not really clear what is the preferred model.

[1] https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webrtc/2015May/0144.html
[2] https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webrtc/2015May/0140.html
[3] https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webrtc/2015May/0148.html
[4] https://github.com/w3c/webrtc-pc/pull/195

[5] https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webrtc/2015May/0123.html
[6] https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webrtc/2015May/0136.html
>


Received on Friday, 29 May 2015 20:28:32 UTC