W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-webrtc@w3.org > November 2017

Re: A very short extension spec: DSCP codepoint control

From: Sergio Garcia Murillo <sergio.garcia.murillo@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 29 Nov 2017 10:21:28 +0100
To: Harald Alvestrand <harald@alvestrand.no>, public-webrtc@w3.org
Message-ID: <89e60888-2d4c-90c1-bb35-2641bb50efb4@gmail.com>
On 28/11/2017 19:15, Harald Alvestrand wrote:
> On 11/28/2017 06:59 PM, Sergio Garcia Murillo wrote:
>> On 28/11/2017 18:42, Harald Alvestrand wrote:
>>> On 11/28/2017 06:32 PM, Sergio Garcia Murillo wrote:
>>>> Hi Harald,
>>>> Just my two cents
>>> Please read and comment on the proposal - I think I've shown how to
>>> get both functionalities in the explainer, without breaking
>>> compatibility.
>> Your proposal seems fine to me, just that I thought IMHO that the API
>> could be cleaner and proposed an alternative, but feel free to ignore it.
>> Best regards
>> Sergio
> Thanks, that wasn't clear to me from your message, I guess my reading
> skills are not good enough.
> Why do you think your API proposal is cleaner? It would make the
> "priority" dictionary member have IDL type "RTCPriorityType OR
> sequence<RTCPriorityType>", with the need to spec what to do in case of
> empty sequence, more than 2 members and so on - this seemed more complex
> to me.
> Probably matter of taste, of course.

I agree that it is a matter of taste.

What I don't quite like about your proposal is that one property, the 
"network priority" can be controlled by two different attributes, 
depending if one is present or not.

The web idl would look like this:

dictionary |RTCRtpEncodingParameters| 
<https://www.w3.org/TR/webrtc/#dom-rtcrtpencodingparameters> { octet 
<https://heycam.github.io/webidl/#idl-octet> |codecPayloadType| 
|RTCDtxStatus| <https://www.w3.org/TR/webrtc/#dom-rtcdtxstatus> |dtx| 
boolean <https://heycam.github.io/webidl/#idl-boolean> |active| 
<https://www.w3.org/TR/webrtc/#dom-rtcrtpencodingparameters-active> = 
true; |(RTCPriorityType| 
<https://www.w3.org/TR/webrtc/#dom-rtcprioritytype> or 
RTCPriorityParameters) |priority| 
<https://www.w3.org/TR/webrtc/#dom-rtcrtpencodingparameters-priority> = 
"low"; unsigned long 
<https://heycam.github.io/webidl/#idl-unsigned-long> |ptime| 
unsigned long <https://heycam.github.io/webidl/#idl-unsigned-long> 
double <https://heycam.github.io/webidl/#idl-double> |maxFramerate| 
DOMString <https://heycam.github.io/webidl/#idl-DOMString> |rid| 
<https://www.w3.org/TR/webrtc/#dom-rtcrtpencodingparameters-rid>; double 
<https://heycam.github.io/webidl/#idl-double> |scaleResolutionDownBy| 
}; dictionary RTCPriorityParameters { |RTCPriorityType| 
<https://www.w3.org/TR/webrtc/#dom-rtcprioritytype>qos = "low"; 
|RTCPriorityType| <https://www.w3.org/TR/webrtc/#dom-rtcprioritytype>  network = "low";};

Note that it is a new dictionary, not a sequence what I am proposing, so 
it should be trivial to explain.

Also, again, I believe that splitting the qos and network priority is a 
very interesting functionality that we should try to add. So this is 
just an alternative proposal that would achieve same functionality than 
yours and may be more acceptable (or not) to someone, so we increase the 
probabilities of having it in.

Best regards
Received on Wednesday, 29 November 2017 09:21:54 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 29 November 2017 09:21:55 UTC