[RTW] Workshop report, version one
Harald Alvestrand
harald at alvestrand.no
Tue Oct 19 17:44:22 CEST 2010
On 10/19/10 02:25, David Singer wrote:
> A number of us talked about the fact that we needed more discussion on
> real-time communication *on the web* i.e. what the particular
> challenges of implementing this in a browser or integrated into the
> web, are. We sadly all know how hard the problem is in general; there
> are plenty of groups working on SIP, IMS, and the like, that we don't
> need to duplicate.
I heard the conversation, but I don't know how to capture it in the
report, since it did not seem to have any specific conclusions drawn
from it - what would you suggest we add to the report?
Harald
>
>
> On Oct 18, 2010, at 15:49 , Bernard Aboba wrote:
>
>> In terms of items for further work, I believe we talked about a STUN
>> API in Javascript, as well as the need for integration between
>> STUN/ICE and Websockets.
>>
>> With respect to ICE, there was some discussion about whether we were
>> talking about ICE, ICE-lite, or ICE with HTTP/HTTPS failover. While
>> settling on the precise ICE functionality might not create an
>> interoperability problem between browser A and browser B if both were
>> connecting to the same service, if they were connecting to
>> different services there is the potential for clients ending up with
>> incompatible ICE Javascript libraries.
>>
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> From: hta at google.com <mailto:hta at google.com>
>> Date: Mon, 18 Oct 2010 17:12:58 +0200
>> To: stefan.lk.hakansson at ericsson.com
>> <mailto:stefan.lk.hakansson at ericsson.com>
>> CC: rtc-web at alvestrand.no <mailto:rtc-web at alvestrand.no>
>> Subject: Re: [RTW] Workshop report, version one
>>
>> Good point! paragraph added.
>>
>> On Mon, Oct 18, 2010 at 16:53, Stefan Håkansson LK
>> <stefan.lk.hakansson at ericsson.com
>> <mailto:stefan.lk.hakansson at ericsson.com>> wrote:
>>
>> Harald,
>>
>> thanks for the report. I find it accurate and well balanced, but
>> I miss one piece:
>>
>> There was an agreement that codec (media format) negotiation
>> should be supported so that codecs supported by the device (maybe
>> being HW accelerated) can be used (if both endpoints support
>> these codecs).
>>
>> Maybe it should go into the codec section (or "other pieces").
>>
>> Stefan
>>
>> ________________________________
>>
>> From: rtc-web-bounces at alvestrand.no
>> <mailto:rtc-web-bounces at alvestrand.no>
>> [mailto:rtc-web-bounces at alvestrand.no
>> <mailto:rtc-web-bounces at alvestrand.no>] On Behalf Of Harald
>> Alvestrand
>> Sent: den 18 oktober 2010 16:03
>> To: rtc-web at alvestrand.no <mailto:rtc-web at alvestrand.no>
>> Subject: [RTW] Workshop report, version one
>>
>>
>> Enclosed (in PDF) is the first version of the RTC-Web workshop
>> report.
>>
>> Comments to the list, please!
>>
>> Harald
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________ RTC-Web mailing list
>> RTC-Web at alvestrand.no <mailto:RTC-Web at alvestrand.no>
>> http://www.alvestrand.no/mailman/listinfo/rtc-web
>> _______________________________________________
>> RTC-Web mailing list
>> RTC-Web at alvestrand.no <mailto:RTC-Web at alvestrand.no>
>> http://www.alvestrand.no/mailman/listinfo/rtc-web
>
> David Singer
> Multimedia and Software Standards, Apple Inc.
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> RTC-Web mailing list
> RTC-Web at alvestrand.no
> http://www.alvestrand.no/mailman/listinfo/rtc-web
>
More information about the RTC-Web
mailing list