Subject: [rtcweb] Review of draft-ietf-rtcweb-jsep-02

From: Harald Alvestrand <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 23 Nov 2012 11:44:40 +0100

I finally put aside time to read through this draft in detail again.

I think we're close to where we need to be on this doc. But still some 
work to be done.
Nits will be sent to the authors - I thought I'd raise some bigger 
issues here.

First is the positioning of this draft.

I believe that the draft should reference the W3C API document and say 
"that one is the authoritative reference for what the API looks like; 
this document shows how the calls from that API are actually affecting 
the media configuration and media bits on the wire".
This is important enough that it needs to be clear from the abstract and 
from the intro.

Second is a matter of wording: The document mentions quite a few things 
that are out of scope, such as the actual signalling, forking, decisions 
on what to accept and so on. I believe those mentions could be shortened 
- the mantra should be "the JS application decides what configurations 
to apply and when to apply them".
The relationship to 3264 needs to be stated clearly - that when the 
application chooses to apply configuration updates in the way specified 
by RFC 3264, the results described in RFC 3264 happen.

Third - SDP requirements. There are two changes that need to be made:
- The requirements need to include BUNDLE and MSID
- The configurable SDP parameters need to explain what "configurable" 
means, and list parameters in the format we talked about in Lyon: 
Parameters that MUST NOT be changed, parameters that MAY be changed, and 
conforming browsers MUST take appropriate notice, and parameters that 
MAY be changed and conforming browsers MAY take appropriate notice.

A fourth matter is rehydration, but I'll return to that after running 
some experiments.