W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-webrtc@w3.org > January 2018

Re: Towards a new charter for the WebRTC Working Group

From: Lorenzo Miniero <lorenzo@meetecho.com>
Date: Thu, 11 Jan 2018 10:20:09 +0100
To: T H Panton <thp@westhawk.co.uk>
Cc: Iñaki Baz Castillo <ibc@aliax.net>, Peter Thatcher <pthatcher@google.com>, Michael Tuexen <Michael.Tuexen@lurchi.franken.de>, Martin Thomson <martin.thomson@gmail.com>, Dominique Hazael-Massieux <dom@w3.org>, "public-webrtc@w3.org" <public-webrtc@w3.org>
Message-ID: <20180111102009.6e0d4a22@lminiero>
On Thu, 11 Jan 2018 09:07:30 +0000
T H Panton <thp@westhawk.co.uk> wrote:

> > On 10 Jan 2018, at 21:43, Iñaki Baz Castillo <ibc@aliax.net> wrote:
> > 
> > On 10 January 2018 at 07:03, Peter Thatcher <pthatcher@google.com>
> > wrote: 
> >> - Ease of deployment.   No offense to usrsctplib, but I hear a lot
> >> of complaints about having to use it to make a non-browser WebRTC
> >> endpoint. It's one of the biggest complaints we hear about WebRTC
> >> data channels: the pain of terminating SCTP (and DTLS).  That's a
> >> big reason why people want QUIC. There will soon be many
> >> implementations to choose from (if there aren't already) and you
> >> only have to terminate one protocol, not two (DTLS and SCTP;
> >> ignoring ICE).  
> > 
> > Absolutely.
> > 
> > QUESTION: How many DataChannel libs / stacks are out there after 6
> > years of WebRTC?  
> 
> I can think of 4. Unfortunately they are mostly tied up in products,
> rather than packaged as libraries.
> 
> The best to-date is probably Janus - getting a datachannel as part of
> a page is super easy. Jitsi has a datachannel library, but it isn't
> easy to get at. Lennart has RAWRTC
> and I'm working on |pipe|
> 


Both Janus and (please correct me if I'm wrong Lennart) RAWRTC use
usrsctp to implement datachannels, though, which is what I believe
Iñaki was referring to: the lack of alternative libraries to implement
the underlying transport. That said, I don't think it would be easier
to find QUIC stack implementations: it would probably be just as hard.

Lorenzo


> 
> > 
> > And no, usrsctplib is not the way to go. If, after 6 years, a
> > technology has not produced community driven implementations with
> > support for multiple languages, then something is just WRONG. How is
> > it possible that, after 6 YEARS, we don't have ANY tinny library in
> > ANY language to just run a simple script that connects via ICE +
> > DTLS and establishes a DataChannel connection? Instead of that, we
> > have "monster" projects (such as the wrongly called node-webrtc)
> > that embeds the whole Google's libwebrtc (even if just the
> > DataChannel feature is required).
> > 
> >   
> 
> |pipe| is a 6.7 Mb download that lets you write code like this:
> 
> var mapper = new BiFunc(){
>     apply: function (label, stream) {
>         Log.info("new inbound datachannel");
>         var ret = null;
>         switch (label) {
>             case 'byteEcho':
>                 ret = new SCTPByteStreamListener(){
>                     onMessage: function (stream, m) {
>                         stream.send(m);
>                     },
>                     close: function (s) {
>                         System.exit(0);
>                     }
>                 }
>                 break;
> 	}
>     }
> }
> 
> Unfortunately it includes some proprietary ideas so it isn't open
> source.
> 
> T.
> 
> > -- 
> > Iñaki Baz Castillo
> > <ibc@aliax.net>
> >   
> 
> 



-- 
I'm getting older but, unlike whisky, I'm not getting any better
https://twitter.com/elminiero
Received on Thursday, 11 January 2018 09:20:45 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Thursday, 11 January 2018 09:20:46 UTC