Subject: [clue] Just an FYI: Another analysis of SDP/RTCWEB

From: Mary Barnes <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 7 Mar 2013 13:57:22 -0600

<as individual>
Here's another blog post that discusses the RTCWEB/SDP issues.  I
still believe some of this discussion is quite relevant - I *love* the
photo:
http://blog.webrtc.is/2013/02/26/sdp-in-webrtc-who-cares/

Just as it was discussed on the RTCWEB list, many of the SDP
proponents are wanting to protect current products. That was the
reason that SDPNG was abandoned. And, certainly, that can be deemed a
fairly strong argument as it appears that it might at first appear to
require more work not to reuse SDP as much as possible.  However, I
would contend that the interop challenge and changes required to SDP
code will be more expensive in the long run than a solution that
minimizes the dependency on SDP.

Mary.

---

From: Christer Holmberg <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 7 Mar 2013 20:03:39 +0000

Not sure I would call it a proper analysis, but it's fun reading... :)

Regards,

Christer
________________________________________
From: [email-masked] [[email-masked]] on behalf of Mary Barnes [[email-masked]]
Sent: Thursday, 07 March 2013 9:57 PM
To: CLUE
Subject: [clue] Just an FYI: Another analysis of SDP/RTCWEB

<as individual>

Mary.
_______________________________________________
clue mailing list
[email-masked]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/clue