15:56:22 RRSAgent has joined #webrtc 15:56:22 logging to http://www.w3.org/2017/01/25-webrtc-irc 15:56:24 RRSAgent, make logs world 15:56:24 Zakim has joined #webrtc 15:56:26 Zakim, this will be RTC 15:56:26 ok, trackbot 15:56:27 Meeting: Web Real-Time Communications Working Group Teleconference 15:56:27 Date: 25 January 2017 15:59:15 Present+ Dominique_Hazael-Massieux, Bernard_Aboba, Dan_Burnett, Misi, Taylor_Brandsetter 15:59:17 Shijun has joined #webrtc 15:59:58 Present+ Stefan_Hakansson 16:00:04 jib has joined #webrtc 16:00:38 stefanh has joined #webrtc 16:02:01 Present+ Jan-Ivar_Bruaroey 16:02:15 Present+ Harald_Alvestrand 16:02:30 Present+ Varun_Singh 16:02:59 vivien has changed the topic to: https://www.w3.org/2011/04/webrtc/wiki/January_25_2017 16:03:00 vr000m has joined #webrtc 16:03:13 Present+ HyukHoon_Shim 16:04:06 hta1 has joined #webrtc 16:04:56 Yes 16:05:01 ScribeNick: varun 16:05:20 Slide 5: Discussions for today 16:05:40 Slide 7: WebRTC PR 996 16:05:50 Agenda: https://www.w3.org/2011/04/webrtc/wiki/January_25_2017 16:06:03 -> https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/1-wlFMGUUH3LKsC7T4ZWzKKTHg6RR5X3NDnMeoZ7P5sA/edit?usp=sharing Slides for this call 16:06:23 Present+ Vivien_Lacourba 16:06:38 present+ Vivien_Lacourba 16:06:52 -> https://github.com/w3c/webrtc-pc/issues/979 Issue 979 When is an RTCSctpTransport Created and Destroyed? 16:07:06 -> https://github.com/w3c/webrtc-pc/pull/996 PR 996 addressing issue 979 16:07:45 Taylor: recommends that the Sctp association can be created only when the setRemoteDescription is applied 16:08:28 Bernard: alternative would be to have it created in the localDescription and the "max-message-size" value settable when the remote description is available 16:08:46 Harald: it would be possible to do this earlier, when the PRANSWER is available 16:09:11 Bernard: the problem is that currently there is no state in the SCTP transport 16:09:43 Is that Taylor or PeterT? 16:10:08 Chair: Harald, Stefan 16:10:36 pthatcher: not have it in the peerconnection until the stable state is achieved. 16:11:14 taylor: we perhaps need it in the pranswer state, because the developer can read the max-message-size and use it. 16:11:22 taylor: will update the PR. 16:11:42 Topci: Issue 116 Stats selector 16:11:43 -> https://github.com/w3c/webrtc-stats/issues/116 Issue 116 RTCPeerConnection.getStats: What to do with 'selector' argument? 16:11:43 -> https://github.com/w3c/webrtc-pc/pull/990 Add an explicit stats selection algorithm 16:11:54 s/Topci/Topic/ 16:12:30 can someone take over if I get involved? 16:13:03 harald: explaining the issue, and the differences between Chrome and Firefox. 16:15:02 Present+ Peter_Thatcher 16:15:03 Present+ Andy_Hutton 16:15:55 Why not just return: RTCMediaStreamTrackStats and RTCRTPStreamStats 16:16:07 jesup has joined #webrtc 16:16:31 jan-ivar: explaining why there might be need some recursive stats, not just the track. 16:18:05 varun: I have not seen use cases with selectors where you would need everything e.g. transports info 16:18:40 ... just returning the RTP RTP stream stats and @@@ would be sufficient 16:21:30 RTCRTPStreamStats covers the inbound and outbound stats. 16:22:11 Present+ Randell_Jesup 16:23:07 Present+ Patrick_Rockhill 16:23:19 My proposal: RTCInboundRTPStreamStats, RTCOutboundRTPStreamStats, RTCRTPStreamStats, and RTCMediaStreamTrackStats. 16:24:27 present+ Justin_Uberti 16:25:33 Misi has joined #webrtc 16:30:05 Topic: Codecs reoffer & PR 988 16:30:06 -> https://github.com/w3c/webrtc-pc/pull/988 PR 988 Add RTCOfferOptions.reofferOptions 16:30:25 jan-ivar to make a proposal for tracks and sender/receiver as a selector for getStats() 16:31:09 pthatcher: should reofferCodecs be added? 16:31:43 juberti: maybe solve this in jsep first, and later in the pc-spec. 16:32:40 juberti: the idea in JSEP is to reoffer non-connection stuff. this might be a nice fallback in case we are unable to solve this in JSEP. 16:33:29 juberti: can we generalise this: reofferCodecs, reofferExtensions, ... etc. 16:35:27 I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2017/01/25-webrtc-minutes.html vivien 16:36:13 present+ Maire_Reavy 16:37:19 Topic: Compat for offerToReceiveAudio/Video (Issue 709) 16:37:20 -> https://github.com/w3c/webrtc-pc/issues/709 Issue 709 offerToReceiveAudio/offerToReceiveVideo remain in implementations (likely needed for compat) 16:45:09 Topic: BYE and RTCReceiver.track (Issue 961) 16:45:09 -> https://github.com/w3c/webrtc-pc/issues/961 Issue 961 Effect of a BYE on RtpReceiver.track 16:50:51 Bernard: I'll be sumitting different PRs for different pieces of this 16:51:02 ... have a PR for aspect B 16:51:02 ... and will work on one for aspect A 16:51:12 I am back 16:51:21 ... ignore the BYE for FEC / RTX 16:51:45 bernard/pthatcher: bye responds to the primary ssrc 16:51:59 Topic: Event on transceived stopped remotely (Issue 962) 16:51:59 -> https://github.com/w3c/webrtc-pc/issues/962 Issue 962 Event when a transceiver is stopped via remote action 16:52:00 SLide: 17 16:53:00 Justin: on the previous issue, why dont we do the same thing? 16:54:03 bernard: in an SFU case, you receive a BYE and then start getting the media again. 16:54:21 ... so it seems more likely that is the main difference 16:54:39 ... transceiver.stopped is due to remote action 16:54:52 justin: agrees 16:55:16 bernard: will submit a PR. 16:55:42 Topic: Media Capture 16:55:49 Topic: Compat for createObjectUrl (Issue 404) 16:55:49 -> https://github.com/w3c/mediacapture-main/issues/404 Issue 404 Revive createObjectURL? 16:57:45 Stefanh: all vendor prefixes were removed and counters show that the former is much more common 16:59:02 jesup: we would like to see it go away. 16:59:32 burn: the reason we removed it was not clear on how to spec it and how it should work. 17:00:07 jan-ivar: we should remove it. 17:01:54 shijun: would like to remove this as well 17:03:11 juberti/harald: we should remove it. But I do not know how many apps will break. We need to do some work to get people away from the API, because the usage of this API is high. 17:04:00 jesup: should make a deprecation warnings in the logs and discuss-webrtc. If not in release notes. 17:04:55 Topic: Legacy methods maintenance (Issue 425) 17:04:55 -> https://github.com/w3c/mediacapture-main/issues/425 Issue 425 Do we update legacy methods to keep up with the spec? 17:04:58 Slide 23 17:06:12 jan-ivar: we kept the legacy guM callback method. but we have made changes which affects the legacy api 17:06:59 ... so it kinda goes against the reason of keeping the old api, however, wanted to highlight the issue. 17:07:48 burn: one impression, people expected that the error handling would become better. That is different from keeping the legacy API. 17:10:32 Action: do nothing 17:10:32 Error finding 'do'. You can review and register nicknames at . 17:10:51 Topic: Move "advanced" out of the Constrainable pattern (Issue 426) 17:10:51 -> https://github.com/w3c/mediacapture-main/issues/426 Issue 426 Move "advanced" out of the Constrainable pattern 17:12:19 harald: jan-ivar recommended moving advanced from constraibale out, so that it can be used elsewhere. 17:13:27 jan-ivar: arguing for the constrainable pattern because it can be used in other specs, for image-capture. min-max-ideal was sufficient for many cases and advanced is mostly not needed. 17:14:45 burn: on principle I agree, but advanced in several places in the spec, it is used in many places in a normative way. So would consider not removing it. 17:15:56 dom: could use a flag instead. if the flag is set, then you can use the advanced algorithm. 17:16:13 ... and not set then use the simpler algorithm. 17:16:33 harald: image-capture adds more constraints, and uses advanced as well 17:16:55 burn: I was under the impression that this was a strong problem. 17:17:37 jan-ivar: image capture constraints that apply to video are applied immediately, and for the images when the getPhoto() is called. 17:18:12 s/strong problem/strong problem based on what Jan-Ivar said. If not, let's not take any action now./ 17:19:22 Topic: OAUTH & STUN/TURN (Issue 714) 17:19:28 finally, no action for issue 426 17:19:34 -> https://github.com/w3c/webrtc-pc/issues/714 Issue 714 STUN/TURN OAuth token auth parameter passing 17:19:54 -> https://github.com/w3c/webrtc-pc/pull/1000 Separated auth dictionaries for STUN/TURN (PR 1000 ) 17:21:23 karthik has joined #webrtc 17:22:00 misi: too late to do a separated option or should pursue the hybrid option. 17:23:00 justin: prefers to #3. Is not sure how much it will break the existing things. 17:23:24 stefanh: hesitant to break people's code. 17:24:26 misi: it will be hard to add the "realm" to hybrid option. It wont be clear to the developer where to add the "realm" 17:24:53 justin: not sure why it could not be added in some place. 17:25:28 misi: is hybrid is the way? 17:25:53 halard: since we do not want to break spec, we would have to do the hybrid anyway. 17:26:07 bernard: +1 for hybrid. 17:26:33 harald: remove username? 17:26:42 s/remove username?/make username optional?/ 17:27:05 thanks dom. harald needs to confirm. 17:27:23 Yes 17:27:49 hybrid is the fina word. 17:28:08 I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2017/01/25-webrtc-minutes.html vivien 18:25:44 jesup has joined #webrtc 18:58:09 Zakim has left #webrtc 18:59:19 trackbot, end meeting 18:59:19 Zakim, list attendees 18:59:27 RRSAgent, please draft minutes 18:59:27 I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2017/01/25-webrtc-minutes.html trackbot 18:59:28 RRSAgent, bye 18:59:28 I see 1 open action item saved in http://www.w3.org/2017/01/25-webrtc-actions.rdf : 18:59:28 ACTION: do nothing [1] 18:59:28 recorded in http://www.w3.org/2017/01/25-webrtc-irc#T17-10-32