IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [rtcweb] WG Last Call: draft-ietf-rtcweb-use-cases-and-requirements-10 - real-time text

Ted Hardie <ted.ietf@gmail.com> Sun, 03 February 2013 02:55 UTC

Return-Path: <ted.ietf@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0A3B321F8477 for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 2 Feb 2013 18:55:50 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.6
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.6 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, NO_RELAYS=-0.001]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id ZU0217gb0O2d for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 2 Feb 2013 18:55:49 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-ia0-x234.google.com (ia-in-x0234.1e100.net [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4001:c02::234]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 61BBD21F8446 for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Sat, 2 Feb 2013 18:55:49 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-ia0-f180.google.com with SMTP id f27so6793573iae.39 for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Sat, 02 Feb 2013 18:55:48 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:x-received:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id :subject:from:to:cc:content-type; bh=gaIjoJlV/klPACwWLNwgPwr6GTCNdt87bGvH1VwS8sw=; b=pPch9wQmgmrvTlxnw11oGQJN/OWmsPdQmmbMsRjNsgMVwCItjkk2KXh0kELpVjzMhb l+NbN5BI8bbdJYICaQh+P/yoqs7O9LfaX8e02/dTCx8kx5EVSd6rjuTCQwtaqEXBjnvg U8sh64AIl0LQJkySDNgRA/OcL7xw8cw0pZJw6AXxEIv6G/D5TTdYVzO4Crg/fdlNb1Kt KF2wXdxCP+B1tjv3WCZVENuEE849EtDdoB0vxWONilNGOYiJkNPdZmTJKSlTB/yGmgUf MF6rly/X0MhPxnm2EQzIfe8qdDtuvxvptrw3EStNfKwImR9Q2+ZBCVmF0Av+amBe8ZWU DHuA==
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.50.187.225 with SMTP id fv1mr2235464igc.96.1359860148889; Sat, 02 Feb 2013 18:55:48 -0800 (PST)
Received: by 10.43.135.202 with HTTP; Sat, 2 Feb 2013 18:55:48 -0800 (PST)
In-Reply-To: <BLU002-W149D09F7296C2465CA4968093030@phx.gbl>
References: <BLU002-W149D09F7296C2465CA4968093030@phx.gbl>
Date: Sat, 02 Feb 2013 18:55:48 -0800
Message-ID: <CA+9kkMCkJN5TrUA=UWu1g2D5p_RHcBVu3C1zK323hrrd84n+Rw@mail.gmail.com>
From: Ted Hardie <ted.ietf@gmail.com>
To: Bernard Aboba <bernard_aboba@hotmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"
Cc: "rtcweb@ietf.org" <rtcweb@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [rtcweb] WG Last Call: draft-ietf-rtcweb-use-cases-and-requirements-10 - real-time text
X-BeenThere: rtcweb@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: Real-Time Communication in WEB-browsers working group list <rtcweb.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/rtcweb>, <mailto:rtcweb-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/rtcweb>
List-Post: <mailto:rtcweb@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:rtcweb-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rtcweb>, <mailto:rtcweb-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 03 Feb 2013 02:55:50 -0000

On Fri, Feb 1, 2013 at 4:39 PM, Bernard Aboba <bernard_aboba@hotmail.com> wrote:
> Harald said:
>
> "I object to requiring interworking with emergency services."
>
> [BA] The concrete question is "what would such a requirement consist of?"
> beyond the use cases
> and requirements that are already in the document.
>

No, the concrete question is whether the requirement to interwork with
emergency services will constrain the design.  As you are well aware,
emergency services proceeds at a very different pace than much other
work, and imposing that constraint could be very limiting indeed.
Creating *a service* using WebRTC that connects to emergency services
is certainly feasible, because it can mimic other services that
already interwork; requiring that *all* services using WebRTC do so is
a non-starter.

Spoken as a long time watcher of ecrit, geopriv, and rtcweb, but not
as a chair or company rep, just to be clear.

regards,

Ted

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email