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

Re: What would you like to see in WebRTC next? A low-level API?

From: Justin Uberti <juberti@google.com>
Date: Wed, 24 Jan 2018 13:57:14 -0800
Message-ID: <CAOJ7v-1dXKEhBhRctz+gP_vCsJPKYKjYjMC0BLpuSoar+actcg@mail.gmail.com>
To: Iñaki Baz Castillo <ibc@aliax.net>
Cc: Peter Thatcher <pthatcher@google.com>, "public-webrtc@w3.org" <public-webrtc@w3.org>
On Wed, Jan 24, 2018 at 4:26 AM, Iñaki Baz Castillo <ibc@aliax.net> wrote:

> On 24 January 2018 at 07:57, Justin Uberti <juberti@google.com> wrote:
> > Yes, we know. I think that most productive path forward would be to
> support
> > proposals that you like, rather than continually grinding axes.
>
> Sure:
>
> 1) Move to ORTC.


> 2) Make it better. Specially, allow more granular control on how
> RTCRtpParameters are dynamically given to the RTCRtpSender (so instead
> of passing a full JSON "blob" that must be fully re-inspected each
> time, let's just modify a specific subset of fields in those
> parameters).
>

Thanks. If you look at Peter's proposal, he's suggesting something that's
pretty close to that. Basically, instead of a RtpSender, you could get
direct access to an encoder object itself, and would have full control over
its configuration.

I think this would actually be a *lower* level API than ORTC.

>
> 3) Once we have such a low level API done, adding cool stuff such as
> QUIC over DataChannel or RTP over QUIC would become feasible.
>
> --
> Iñaki Baz Castillo
> <ibc@aliax.net>
>
Received on Wednesday, 24 January 2018 21:57:59 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 24 January 2018 21:58:00 UTC