- From: Harald Alvestrand <harald@alvestrand.no>
- Date: Wed, 29 Nov 2017 12:38:40 +0100
- To: Stefan Håkansson LK <stefan.lk.hakansson@ericsson.com>, "public-webrtc@w3.org" <public-webrtc@w3.org>
On 11/29/2017 12:18 PM, Stefan Håkansson LK wrote: > On 29/11/17 11:00, Harald Alvestrand wrote: >> No - setParameters is called once in both cases. > Got it. The spec says: > > 'If networkPriority is unset, the DSCP markings of the generated packets > are controlled by the priority member.' > > But networkPriority has a default ("low"), can you then really say it is > unset? I realized that for this to work, networkPriority has to be nullable (no default), so it doesn't have one. >> Den 29. november 2017 10:41:24 CET, skrev "Stefan Håkansson LK" <stefan.lk >> <http://stefan.lk>.hakansson@ericsson.com>: >> >> On 28/11/17 18:20, Harald Alvestrand wrote: >> >> Picking up on a post-Singapore action item: >> >> I've written a very short (VERY short) spec for an extension to >> webrtc-pc that allows one to control the setting of packet-level >> priority separate from queue-management priority. >> >> This is at https://github.com/alvestrand/webrtc-dscp-exp >> >> Best starting point is probably the explainer: >> >> https://github.com/alvestrand/webrtc-dscp-exp/blob/master/explainer.md >> >> >> for my understanding (looking at the examples), is it right that the >> order you do things in matter, i.e. >> >> pc = new RTCPeerConnection(); >> sender1 = pc.addTrack(track1); >> sender2 = pc.addTrack(track2); >> parameters = await sender1.getParameters(); >> parameters.encodings[0].priority = "high"; >> parameters.encodings[0].networkPriority = "low"; >> sender1.encodingParameters.setParameters(parameters); >> >> would give "low" networkPriority while >> >> pc = new RTCPeerConnection(); >> sender1 = pc.addTrack(track1); >> sender2 = pc.addTrack(track2); >> parameters = await sender1.getParameters(); >> parameters.encodings[0].networkPriority = "low"; >> parameters.encodings[0].priority = "high"; >> sender1.encodingParameters.setParameters(parameters); >> >> would give "high" networkPriority (since .priority = "high" overrides)? >> >> >> >> The question now is - what now? >> >> Possible actions include adopting this in the WG, asking for adoption as >> a WICG spec, or keeping it as an individual contribution. >> >> >> What do people prefer? >> >> >> Harald >> >> >> >> >> >> >> -- >> Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity. >> -- Surveillance is pervasive. Go Dark.
Received on Wednesday, 29 November 2017 11:39:22 UTC