- From: Henrik Boström <hbos@google.com>
- Date: Tue, 14 Jan 2020 16:21:46 +0100
- To: Youenn Fablet <youenn@apple.com>
- Cc: Harald Alvestrand <harald@alvestrand.no>, public-webrtc <public-webrtc@w3.org>
- Message-ID: <CAEbRw2y1jUcKZpmSR-Pi_FD0CMzn+Wphi=ksOHXbbuwOVz207w@mail.gmail.com>
Are there any extensions that are only applicable in one direction? If so, having the capabilities on a per-sender and per-receiver basis would avoid having to filter out the lists. On Tue, Jan 14, 2020 at 10:44 AM Youenn Fablet <youenn@apple.com> wrote: > > > On 14 Jan 2020, at 09:02, Harald Alvestrand <harald@alvestrand.no> wrote: > > > On 1/13/20 10:19 PM, Bernard Aboba wrote: > > > *Depending on the direction, we could potentially be looking at header > extensions that would be sent and received, only sent or only received > (inactive header extensions aren't included in the SDP). So if we were to > do this at the sender/receiver level, we would need two APIs, > RTCRtpSender.setOfferedRtpHeaderExtensions() and > RTCRtpReceiver.setOfferedRtpHeaderExtensions(). This would remove the need > for a direction attribute (which could be determined based on the header > extensions configured for the sender and receiver). But it would require > applications to make two API calls instead of one. * > > > That should not be too complex to shim, if desired by web apps. > > These two methods seem somehow easier to use and understand to me. > It is nice for instance to get the range of values directly from an object > and set the value on the same object. > > From a model standpoint, I also don't want to have API on sender/receiver > that would go away if we used something other than SDP to do negotiation. > > Can you clarify? > If we use something other than SDP, transceiver could potentially go away, > but sender/receiver would still be there. > > Looking at transceiver API, the only not-sender/receiver/direction-related > method is setCodecPreferences. > Putting it at sender/receiver level would have brought some benefits if it > had been feasible. > Like expressing asymmetric codec preferences: favour H264 encoding but > favour H265 decoding, or enable VP8 decoder but disable VP8 encoder. > > Y >
Received on Tuesday, 14 January 2020 15:22:04 UTC