draft-ietf-rtcweb-overview-17.txt   draft-ietf-rtcweb-overview-18.txt 
Network Working Group H. Alvestrand Network Working Group H. Alvestrand
Internet-Draft Google Internet-Draft Google
Intended status: Standards Track February 17, 2017 Intended status: Standards Track March 3, 2017
Expires: August 21, 2017 Expires: September 4, 2017
Overview: Real Time Protocols for Browser-based Applications Overview: Real Time Protocols for Browser-based Applications
draft-ietf-rtcweb-overview-17 draft-ietf-rtcweb-overview-18
Abstract Abstract
This document gives an overview and context of a protocol suite This document gives an overview and context of a protocol suite
intended for use with real-time applications that can be deployed in intended for use with real-time applications that can be deployed in
browsers - "real time communication on the Web". browsers - "real time communication on the Web".
It intends to serve as a starting and coordination point to make sure It intends to serve as a starting and coordination point to make sure
all the parts that are needed to achieve this goal are findable, and all the parts that are needed to achieve this goal are findable, and
that the parts that belong in the Internet protocol suite are fully that the parts that belong in the Internet protocol suite are fully
skipping to change at page 1, line 43 skipping to change at page 1, line 43
Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering
Task Force (IETF). Note that other groups may also distribute Task Force (IETF). Note that other groups may also distribute
working documents as Internet-Drafts. The list of current Internet- working documents as Internet-Drafts. The list of current Internet-
Drafts is at http://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/. Drafts is at http://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/.
Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months
and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any
time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference
material or to cite them other than as "work in progress." material or to cite them other than as "work in progress."
This Internet-Draft will expire on August 21, 2017. This Internet-Draft will expire on September 4, 2017.
Copyright Notice Copyright Notice
Copyright (c) 2017 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the Copyright (c) 2017 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the
document authors. All rights reserved. document authors. All rights reserved.
This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal
Provisions Relating to IETF Documents Provisions Relating to IETF Documents
(http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of (http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of
publication of this document. Please review these documents publication of this document. Please review these documents
skipping to change at page 2, line 41 skipping to change at page 2, line 41
11. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15 11. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
12. Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 12. Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
13. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 13. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
13.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 13.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
13.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18 13.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
Appendix A. Change log . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19 Appendix A. Change log . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
A.1. Changes from draft-alvestrand-dispatch-rtcweb-datagram-00 A.1. Changes from draft-alvestrand-dispatch-rtcweb-datagram-00
to -01 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19 to -01 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
A.2. Changes from draft-alvestrand-dispatch-01 to draft- A.2. Changes from draft-alvestrand-dispatch-01 to draft-
alvestrand-rtcweb-overview-00 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19 alvestrand-rtcweb-overview-00 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
A.3. Changes from draft-alvestrand-rtcweb-00 to -01 . . . . . 19 A.3. Changes from draft-alvestrand-rtcweb-00 to -01 . . . . . 20
A.4. Changes from draft-alvestrand-rtcweb-overview-01 to A.4. Changes from draft-alvestrand-rtcweb-overview-01 to
draft-ietf-rtcweb-overview-00 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20 draft-ietf-rtcweb-overview-00 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20
A.5. Changes from -00 to -01 of draft-ietf-rtcweb-overview . . 20 A.5. Changes from -00 to -01 of draft-ietf-rtcweb-overview . . 20
A.6. Changes from -01 to -02 of draft-ietf-rtcweb-overview . . 20 A.6. Changes from -01 to -02 of draft-ietf-rtcweb-overview . . 20
A.7. Changes from -02 to -03 of draft-ietf-rtcweb-overview . . 20 A.7. Changes from -02 to -03 of draft-ietf-rtcweb-overview . . 20
A.8. Changes from -03 to -04 of draft-ietf-rtcweb-overview . . 21 A.8. Changes from -03 to -04 of draft-ietf-rtcweb-overview . . 21
A.9. Changes from -04 to -05 of draft-ietf-rtcweb-overview . . 21 A.9. Changes from -04 to -05 of draft-ietf-rtcweb-overview . . 21
A.10. Changes from -05 to -06 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21 A.10. Changes from -05 to -06 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21
A.11. Changes from -06 to -07 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21 A.11. Changes from -06 to -07 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21
A.12. Changes from -07 to -08 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21 A.12. Changes from -07 to -08 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21
A.13. Changes from -08 to -09 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21 A.13. Changes from -08 to -09 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21
A.14. Changes from -09 to -10 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21 A.14. Changes from -09 to -10 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22
A.15. Changes from -10 to -11 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22 A.15. Changes from -10 to -11 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22
A.16. Changes from -11 to -12 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22 A.16. Changes from -11 to -12 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22
A.17. Changes from -12 to -13 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22 A.17. Changes from -12 to -13 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22
A.18. Changes from -13 to -14 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22 A.18. Changes from -13 to -14 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23
A.19. Changes from -14 to -15 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22 A.19. Changes from -14 to -15 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23
A.20. Changes from -15 to -16 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22 A.20. Changes from -15 to -16 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23
A.21. Changes from -16 to -17 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23 A.21. Changes from -16 to -17 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23
A.22. Changes from -17 to -18 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23
Author's Address . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23 Author's Address . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23
1. Introduction 1. Introduction
The Internet was, from very early in its lifetime, considered a The Internet was, from very early in its lifetime, considered a
possible vehicle for the deployment of real-time, interactive possible vehicle for the deployment of real-time, interactive
applications - with the most easily imaginable being audio applications - with the most easily imaginable being audio
conversations (aka "Internet telephony") and video conferencing. conversations (aka "Internet telephony") and video conferencing.
The first attempts to build this were dependent on special networks, The first attempts to build this were dependent on special networks,
skipping to change at page 4, line 11 skipping to change at page 4, line 11
the development of HTML5, application developers see much promise in the development of HTML5, application developers see much promise in
the possibility of making those interfaces available in a the possibility of making those interfaces available in a
standardized way within the browser. standardized way within the browser.
This memo describes a set of building blocks that can be made This memo describes a set of building blocks that can be made
accessible and controllable through a Javascript API in a browser, accessible and controllable through a Javascript API in a browser,
and which together form a sufficient set of functions to allow the and which together form a sufficient set of functions to allow the
use of interactive audio and video in applications that communicate use of interactive audio and video in applications that communicate
directly between browsers across the Internet. The resulting directly between browsers across the Internet. The resulting
protocol suite is intended to enable all the applications that are protocol suite is intended to enable all the applications that are
described as required scenarios in the use cases document described as required scenarios in the use cases document [RFC7478].
[I-D.ietf-rtcweb-use-cases-and-requirements].
Other efforts, for instance the W3C WEBRTC, Web Applications and Other efforts, for instance the W3C WEBRTC, Web Applications and
Device API working groups, focus on making standardized APIs and Device API working groups, focus on making standardized APIs and
interfaces available, within or alongside the HTML5 effort, for those interfaces available, within or alongside the HTML5 effort, for those
functions; this memo concentrates on specifying the protocols and functions; this memo concentrates on specifying the protocols and
subprotocols that are needed to specify the interactions that happen subprotocols that are needed to specify the interactions that happen
across the network. across the network.
This memo uses the term "WebRTC" (note the case used) to refer to the This memo uses the term "WebRTC" (note the case used) to refer to the
overall effort consisting of both IETF and W3C efforts. overall effort consisting of both IETF and W3C efforts.
skipping to change at page 5, line 33 skipping to change at page 5, line 30
exercise that option or feature; similarly, for any sequence of API exercise that option or feature; similarly, for any sequence of API
calls, it should be clear which protocol options and features will be calls, it should be clear which protocol options and features will be
invoked. Both subject to constraints of the implementation, of invoked. Both subject to constraints of the implementation, of
course. course.
For the purpose of this document, we define the following terminology For the purpose of this document, we define the following terminology
to talk about WebRTC things: to talk about WebRTC things:
o A WebRTC browser (also called a WebRTC User Agent or WebRTC UA) is o A WebRTC browser (also called a WebRTC User Agent or WebRTC UA) is
something that conforms to both the protocol specification and the something that conforms to both the protocol specification and the
Javascript API defined above. Javascript API cited above.
o A WebRTC non-browser is something that conforms to the protocol o A WebRTC non-browser is something that conforms to the protocol
specification, but does not claim to implement the Javascript API. specification, but does not claim to implement the Javascript API.
This can also be called a "WebRTC device" or "WebRTC native This can also be called a "WebRTC device" or "WebRTC native
application". application".
o A WebRTC endpoint is either a WebRTC browser or a WebRTC non- o A WebRTC endpoint is either a WebRTC browser or a WebRTC non-
browser. It conforms to the protocol specification. browser. It conforms to the protocol specification.
o A WebRTC-compatible endpoint is an endpoint that is able to o A WebRTC-compatible endpoint is an endpoint that is able to
skipping to change at page 7, line 15 skipping to change at page 7, line 10
The alternative - that of having no mandatory to implement - does not The alternative - that of having no mandatory to implement - does not
mean that you cannot communicate, it merely means that in order to be mean that you cannot communicate, it merely means that in order to be
part of the communications partnership, you have to implement the part of the communications partnership, you have to implement the
standard "and then some" - that "and then some" usually being called standard "and then some" - that "and then some" usually being called
a profile of some sort; in the version most antithetical to the a profile of some sort; in the version most antithetical to the
Internet ethos, that "and then some" consists of having to use a Internet ethos, that "and then some" consists of having to use a
specific vendor's product only. specific vendor's product only.
2.4. Terminology 2.4. Terminology
The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT",
"SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this
document are to be interpreted as described in [RFC2119].
The following terms are used across the documents specifying the The following terms are used across the documents specifying the
WebRTC suite, in the specific meanings given here. Not all terms are WebRTC suite, in the specific meanings given here. Not all terms are
used in this document. Other terms are used in their commonly used used in this document. Other terms are used in their commonly used
meaning. meaning.
The list is in alphabetical order. The list is in alphabetical order.
Agent: Undefined term. See "SDP Agent" and "ICE Agent". Agent: Undefined term. See "SDP Agent" and "ICE Agent".
API: Application Programming Interface - a specification of a set of API: Application Programming Interface - a specification of a set of
skipping to change at page 7, line 40 skipping to change at page 7, line 39
in the HTML specification [W3C.WD-html5-20110525]. See also in the HTML specification [W3C.WD-html5-20110525]. See also
"WebRTC User Agent". "WebRTC User Agent".
Data channel: An abstraction that allows data to be sent between Data channel: An abstraction that allows data to be sent between
WebRTC endpoints in the form of messages. Two endpoints can have WebRTC endpoints in the form of messages. Two endpoints can have
multiple data channels between them. multiple data channels between them.
ICE Agent: An implementation of the Interactive Connectivty ICE Agent: An implementation of the Interactive Connectivty
Establishment (ICE) [I-D.ietf-ice-rfc5245bis] protocol. An ICE Establishment (ICE) [I-D.ietf-ice-rfc5245bis] protocol. An ICE
Agent may also be an SDP Agent, but there exist ICE Agents that do Agent may also be an SDP Agent, but there exist ICE Agents that do
not use SDP (for instance those that use Jingle). not use SDP (for instance those that use Jingle [XEP-0166]).
Interactive: Communication between multiple parties, where the Interactive: Communication between multiple parties, where the
expectation is that an action from one party can cause a reaction expectation is that an action from one party can cause a reaction
by another party, and the reaction can be observed by the first by another party, and the reaction can be observed by the first
party, with the total time required for the action/reaction/ party, with the total time required for the action/reaction/
observation is on the order of no more than hundreds of observation is on the order of no more than hundreds of
milliseconds. milliseconds.
Media: Audio and video content. Not to be confused with Media: Audio and video content. Not to be confused with
"transmission media" such as wires. "transmission media" such as wires.
skipping to change at page 8, line 28 skipping to change at page 8, line 28
SDP Agent: The protocol implementation involved in the SDP offer/ SDP Agent: The protocol implementation involved in the SDP offer/
answer exchange, as defined in [RFC3264] section 3. answer exchange, as defined in [RFC3264] section 3.
Signaling: Communication that happens in order to establish, manage Signaling: Communication that happens in order to establish, manage
and control media paths and data paths. and control media paths and data paths.
Signaling Path: The communication channels used between entities Signaling Path: The communication channels used between entities
participating in signaling to transfer signaling. There may be participating in signaling to transfer signaling. There may be
more entities in the signaling path than in the media path. more entities in the signaling path than in the media path.
NOTE: Where common definitions exist for these terms, those
definitions should be used to the greatest extent possible.
3. Architecture and Functionality groups 3. Architecture and Functionality groups
The model of real-time support for browser-based applications does The model of real-time support for browser-based applications does
not assume that the browser will contain all the functions that need not assume that the browser will contain all the functions that need
to be performed in order to have a function such as a telephone or a to be performed in order to have a function such as a telephone or a
video conferencing unit; the vision is that the browser will have the video conferencing unit; the vision is that the browser will have the
functions that are needed for a Web application, working in functions that are needed for a Web application, working in
conjunction with its backend servers, to implement these functions. conjunction with its backend servers, to implement these functions.
This means that two vital interfaces need specification: The This means that two vital interfaces need specification: The
skipping to change at page 13, line 27 skipping to change at page 13, line 27
The intent of this specification is to allow each communications The intent of this specification is to allow each communications
event to use the data formats that are best suited for that event to use the data formats that are best suited for that
particular instance, where a format is supported by both sides of the particular instance, where a format is supported by both sides of the
connection. However, a minimum standard is greatly helpful in order connection. However, a minimum standard is greatly helpful in order
to ensure that communication can be achieved. This document to ensure that communication can be achieved. This document
specifies a minimum baseline that will be supported by all specifies a minimum baseline that will be supported by all
implementations of this specification, and leaves further codecs to implementations of this specification, and leaves further codecs to
be included at the will of the implementor. be included at the will of the implementor.
WebRTC endpoints that support audio and/or video MUST implement the WebRTC endpoints that support audio and/or video MUST implement the
codecs and profiles required in [I-D.ietf-rtcweb-audio] and codecs and profiles required in [RFC7874] and [RFC7742].
[I-D.ietf-rtcweb-video].
7. Connection management 7. Connection management
The methods, mechanisms and requirements for setting up, negotiating The methods, mechanisms and requirements for setting up, negotiating
and tearing down connections is a large subject, and one where it is and tearing down connections is a large subject, and one where it is
desirable to have both interoperability and freedom to innovate. desirable to have both interoperability and freedom to innovate.
The following principles apply: The following principles apply:
1. The WebRTC media negotiations will be capable of representing the 1. The WebRTC media negotiations will be capable of representing the
skipping to change at page 14, line 17 skipping to change at page 14, line 17
able to use the new codecs where appropriate with no changes to able to use the new codecs where appropriate with no changes to
the JS applications. the JS applications.
The particular choices made for WebRTC, and their implications for The particular choices made for WebRTC, and their implications for
the API offered by a browser implementing WebRTC, are described in the API offered by a browser implementing WebRTC, are described in
[I-D.ietf-rtcweb-jsep]. [I-D.ietf-rtcweb-jsep].
WebRTC browsers MUST implement [I-D.ietf-rtcweb-jsep]. WebRTC browsers MUST implement [I-D.ietf-rtcweb-jsep].
WebRTC endpoints MUST implement the functions described in that WebRTC endpoints MUST implement the functions described in that
document that relate to the network layer (for example Bundle, RTCP- document that relate to the network layer (for example Bundle
mux and Trickle ICE), but do not need to support the API [I-D.ietf-mmusic-sdp-bundle-negotiation], RTCP-mux [RFC5761] and
functionality described there. Trickle ICE [I-D.ietf-ice-trickle]), but do not need to support the
API functionality described there.
8. Presentation and control 8. Presentation and control
The most important part of control is the user's control over the The most important part of control is the user's control over the
browser's interaction with input/output devices and communications browser's interaction with input/output devices and communications
channels. It is important that the user have some way of figuring channels. It is important that the user have some way of figuring
out where his audio, video or texting is being sent, for what out where his audio, video or texting is being sent, for what
purported reason, and what guarantees are made by the parties that purported reason, and what guarantees are made by the parties that
form part of this control channel. This is largely a local function form part of this control channel. This is largely a local function
between the browser, the underlying operating system and the user between the browser, the underlying operating system and the user
skipping to change at page 14, line 50 skipping to change at page 14, line 51
algorithm does not need coordination. In some cases (for instance algorithm does not need coordination. In some cases (for instance
echo cancellation, as described below), the overall system definition echo cancellation, as described below), the overall system definition
may need to specify that the overall system needs to have some may need to specify that the overall system needs to have some
characteristics for which these facilities are useful, without characteristics for which these facilities are useful, without
requiring them to be implemented a certain way. requiring them to be implemented a certain way.
Local functions include echo cancellation, volume control, camera Local functions include echo cancellation, volume control, camera
management including focus, zoom, pan/tilt controls (if available), management including focus, zoom, pan/tilt controls (if available),
and more. and more.
Certain parts of the system SHOULD conform to certain properties, for One would want to see certain parts of the system conform to certain
instance: properties, for instance:
o Echo cancellation should be good enough to achieve the suppression o Echo cancellation should be good enough to achieve the suppression
of acoustical feedback loops below a perceptually noticeable of acoustical feedback loops below a perceptually noticeable
level. level.
o Privacy concerns MUST be satisfied; for instance, if remote o Privacy concerns MUST be satisfied; for instance, if remote
control of camera is offered, the APIs should be available to let control of camera is offered, the APIs should be available to let
the local participant figure out who's controlling the camera, and the local participant figure out who's controlling the camera, and
possibly decide to revoke the permission for camera usage. possibly decide to revoke the permission for camera usage.
o Automatic gain control, if present, should normalize a speaking o Automatic gain control, if present, should normalize a speaking
voice into a reasonable dB range. voice into a reasonable dB range.
The requirements on WebRTC systems with regard to audio processing The requirements on WebRTC systems with regard to audio processing
are found in [I-D.ietf-rtcweb-audio]; the proposed API for control of are found in [RFC7874] and includes more guidance about echo
local devices are found in [W3C.WD-mediacapture-streams-20120628]. cancellation and AGC; the proposed API for control of local devices
are found in [W3C.WD-mediacapture-streams-20120628].
WebRTC endpoints MUST implement the processing functions in WebRTC endpoints MUST implement the processing functions in
[I-D.ietf-rtcweb-audio]. (Together with the requirement in [RFC7874]. (Together with the requirement in Section 6, this means
Section 6, this means that WebRTC endpoints MUST implement the whole that WebRTC endpoints MUST implement the whole document.)
document.)
10. IANA Considerations 10. IANA Considerations
This document makes no request of IANA. This document makes no request of IANA.
Note to RFC Editor: this section may be removed on publication as an Note to RFC Editor: this section may be removed on publication as an
RFC. RFC.
11. Security Considerations 11. Security Considerations
skipping to change at page 16, line 27 skipping to change at page 16, line 27
The ones below have made special, identifiable contributions; this The ones below have made special, identifiable contributions; this
does not mean that others' contributions are less important. does not mean that others' contributions are less important.
Thanks to Cary Bran, Cullen Jennings, Colin Perkins, Magnus Thanks to Cary Bran, Cullen Jennings, Colin Perkins, Magnus
Westerlund and Joerg Ott, who offered technical contributions on Westerlund and Joerg Ott, who offered technical contributions on
various versions of the draft. various versions of the draft.
Thanks to Jonathan Rosenberg, Matthew Kaufman and others at Skype for Thanks to Jonathan Rosenberg, Matthew Kaufman and others at Skype for
the ASCII drawings in section 1. the ASCII drawings in section 1.
Thanks to Bjoern Hoehrmann, Colin Perkins, Colton Shields, Eric Thanks to Alissa Cooper, Bjoern Hoehrmann, Colin Perkins, Colton
Rescorla, Heath Matlock, Henry Sinnreich, Justin Uberti, Keith Drage, Shields, Eric Rescorla, Heath Matlock, Henry Sinnreich, Justin
Magnus Westerlund, Olle E. Johansson and Simon Leinen for document Uberti, Keith Drage, Magnus Westerlund, Olle E. Johansson, Sean
review. Turner and Simon Leinen for document review.
13. References 13. References
13.1. Normative References 13.1. Normative References
[I-D.ietf-ice-rfc5245bis] [I-D.ietf-ice-rfc5245bis]
Keranen, A., Holmberg, C., and J. Rosenberg, "Interactive Keranen, A., Holmberg, C., and J. Rosenberg, "Interactive
Connectivity Establishment (ICE): A Protocol for Network Connectivity Establishment (ICE): A Protocol for Network
Address Translator (NAT) Traversal", draft-ietf-ice- Address Translator (NAT) Traversal", draft-ietf-ice-
rfc5245bis-08 (work in progress), December 2016. rfc5245bis-08 (work in progress), December 2016.
[I-D.ietf-rtcweb-audio]
Valin, J. and C. Bran, "WebRTC Audio Codec and Processing
Requirements", draft-ietf-rtcweb-audio-11 (work in
progress), April 2016.
[I-D.ietf-rtcweb-data-channel] [I-D.ietf-rtcweb-data-channel]
Jesup, R., Loreto, S., and M. Tuexen, "WebRTC Data Jesup, R., Loreto, S., and M. Tuexen, "WebRTC Data
Channels", draft-ietf-rtcweb-data-channel-13 (work in Channels", draft-ietf-rtcweb-data-channel-11 (work in
progress), January 2015. progress), July 2014.
[I-D.ietf-rtcweb-data-protocol] [I-D.ietf-rtcweb-data-protocol]
Jesup, R., Loreto, S., and M. Tuexen, "WebRTC Data Channel Jesup, R., Loreto, S., and M. Tuexen, "WebRTC Data Channel
Establishment Protocol", draft-ietf-rtcweb-data- Establishment Protocol", draft-ietf-rtcweb-data-
protocol-09 (work in progress), January 2015. protocol-07 (work in progress), July 2014.
[I-D.ietf-rtcweb-jsep] [I-D.ietf-rtcweb-jsep]
Uberti, J., Jennings, C., and E. Rescorla, "Javascript Uberti, J., Jennings, C., and E. Rescorla, "Javascript
Session Establishment Protocol", draft-ietf-rtcweb-jsep-18 Session Establishment Protocol", draft-ietf-rtcweb-jsep-07
(work in progress), January 2017. (work in progress), July 2014.
[I-D.ietf-rtcweb-rtp-usage] [I-D.ietf-rtcweb-rtp-usage]
Perkins, C., Westerlund, M., and J. Ott, "Web Real-Time Perkins, C., Westerlund, M., and J. Ott, "Web Real-Time
Communication (WebRTC): Media Transport and Use of RTP", Communication (WebRTC): Media Transport and Use of RTP",
draft-ietf-rtcweb-rtp-usage-26 (work in progress), March draft-ietf-rtcweb-rtp-usage-16 (work in progress), July
2016. 2014.
[I-D.ietf-rtcweb-security] [I-D.ietf-rtcweb-security]
Rescorla, E., "Security Considerations for WebRTC", draft- Rescorla, E., "Security Considerations for WebRTC", draft-
ietf-rtcweb-security-08 (work in progress), February 2015. ietf-rtcweb-security-07 (work in progress), July 2014.
[I-D.ietf-rtcweb-security-arch] [I-D.ietf-rtcweb-security-arch]
Rescorla, E., "WebRTC Security Architecture", draft-ietf- Rescorla, E., "WebRTC Security Architecture", draft-ietf-
rtcweb-security-arch-12 (work in progress), June 2016. rtcweb-security-arch-10 (work in progress), July 2014.
[I-D.ietf-rtcweb-transports] [I-D.ietf-rtcweb-transports]
Alvestrand, H., "Transports for WebRTC", draft-ietf- Alvestrand, H., "Transports for WebRTC", draft-ietf-
rtcweb-transports-17 (work in progress), October 2016. rtcweb-transports-06 (work in progress), August 2014.
[I-D.ietf-rtcweb-video] [RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate
Roach, A., "WebRTC Video Processing and Codec Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, March 1997.
Requirements", draft-ietf-rtcweb-video-06 (work in
progress), June 2015.
[RFC3264] Rosenberg, J. and H. Schulzrinne, "An Offer/Answer Model [RFC3264] Rosenberg, J. and H. Schulzrinne, "An Offer/Answer Model
with Session Description Protocol (SDP)", RFC 3264, with Session Description Protocol (SDP)", RFC 3264, June
DOI 10.17487/RFC3264, June 2002, 2002.
<http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc3264>.
[RFC3550] Schulzrinne, H., Casner, S., Frederick, R., and V. [RFC3550] Schulzrinne, H., Casner, S., Frederick, R., and V.
Jacobson, "RTP: A Transport Protocol for Real-Time Jacobson, "RTP: A Transport Protocol for Real-Time
Applications", STD 64, RFC 3550, DOI 10.17487/RFC3550, Applications", STD 64, RFC 3550, July 2003.
July 2003, <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc3550>.
[RFC3711] Baugher, M., McGrew, D., Naslund, M., Carrara, E., and K. [RFC3711] Baugher, M., McGrew, D., Naslund, M., Carrara, E., and K.
Norrman, "The Secure Real-time Transport Protocol (SRTP)", Norrman, "The Secure Real-time Transport Protocol (SRTP)",
RFC 3711, DOI 10.17487/RFC3711, March 2004, RFC 3711, March 2004.
<http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc3711>.
[RFC7742] Roach, A., "WebRTC Video Processing and Codec
Requirements", RFC 7742, DOI 10.17487/RFC7742, March 2016,
<http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7742>.
[RFC7874] Valin, JM. and C. Bran, "WebRTC Audio Codec and Processing
Requirements", RFC 7874, DOI 10.17487/RFC7874, May 2016,
<http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7874>.
[W3C.WD-mediacapture-streams-20120628] [W3C.WD-mediacapture-streams-20120628]
Burnett, D. and A. Narayanan, "Media Capture and Streams", Burnett, D. and A. Narayanan, "Media Capture and Streams",
World Wide Web Consortium WD WD-mediacapture-streams- World Wide Web Consortium WD WD-mediacapture-streams-
20120628, June 2012, <http://www.w3.org/TR/2012/ 20120628, June 2012, <http://www.w3.org/TR/2012/
WD-mediacapture-streams-20120628>. WD-mediacapture-streams-20120628>.
[W3C.WD-webrtc-20120209] [W3C.WD-webrtc-20120209]
Bergkvist, A., Burnett, D., Jennings, C., and A. Bergkvist, A., Burnett, D., Jennings, C., and A.
Narayanan, "WebRTC 1.0: Real-time Communication Between Narayanan, "WebRTC 1.0: Real-time Communication Between
Browsers", World Wide Web Consortium WD WD-webrtc- Browsers", World Wide Web Consortium WD WD-webrtc-
20120209, February 2012, 20120209, February 2012,
<http://www.w3.org/TR/2012/WD-webrtc-20120209>. <http://www.w3.org/TR/2012/WD-webrtc-20120209>.
13.2. Informative References 13.2. Informative References
[I-D.ietf-ice-trickle]
Ivov, E., Rescorla, E., Uberti, J., and P. Saint-Andre,
"Trickle ICE: Incremental Provisioning of Candidates for
the Interactive Connectivity Establishment (ICE)
Protocol", draft-ietf-ice-trickle-07 (work in progress),
February 2017.
[I-D.ietf-mmusic-sdp-bundle-negotiation]
Holmberg, C., Alvestrand, H., and C. Jennings,
"Negotiating Media Multiplexing Using the Session
Description Protocol (SDP)", draft-ietf-mmusic-sdp-bundle-
negotiation-07 (work in progress), April 2014.
[I-D.ietf-rtcweb-gateways] [I-D.ietf-rtcweb-gateways]
Alvestrand, H. and U. Rauschenbach, "WebRTC Gateways", Alvestrand, H. and U. Rauschenbach, "WebRTC Gateways",
draft-ietf-rtcweb-gateways-02 (work in progress), January draft-ietf-rtcweb-gateways-02 (work in progress), January
2016. 2016.
[I-D.ietf-rtcweb-use-cases-and-requirements]
Holmberg, C., Hakansson, S., and G. Eriksson, "Web Real-
Time Communication Use-cases and Requirements", draft-
ietf-rtcweb-use-cases-and-requirements-16 (work in
progress), January 2015.
[RFC3261] Rosenberg, J., Schulzrinne, H., Camarillo, G., Johnston, [RFC3261] Rosenberg, J., Schulzrinne, H., Camarillo, G., Johnston,
A., Peterson, J., Sparks, R., Handley, M., and E. A., Peterson, J., Sparks, R., Handley, M., and E.
Schooler, "SIP: Session Initiation Protocol", RFC 3261, Schooler, "SIP: Session Initiation Protocol", RFC 3261,
DOI 10.17487/RFC3261, June 2002, June 2002.
<http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc3261>.
[RFC3935] Alvestrand, H., "A Mission Statement for the IETF", [RFC3935] Alvestrand, H., "A Mission Statement for the IETF", BCP
BCP 95, RFC 3935, DOI 10.17487/RFC3935, October 2004, 95, RFC 3935, October 2004.
<http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc3935>.
[RFC5761] Perkins, C. and M. Westerlund, "Multiplexing RTP Data and
Control Packets on a Single Port", RFC 5761, April 2010.
[RFC6120] Saint-Andre, P., "Extensible Messaging and Presence [RFC6120] Saint-Andre, P., "Extensible Messaging and Presence
Protocol (XMPP): Core", RFC 6120, DOI 10.17487/RFC6120, Protocol (XMPP): Core", RFC 6120, March 2011.
March 2011, <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc6120>.
[RFC7478] Holmberg, C., Hakansson, S., and G. Eriksson, "Web Real-
Time Communication Use Cases and Requirements", RFC 7478,
DOI 10.17487/RFC7478, March 2015,
<http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7478>.
[W3C.WD-html5-20110525] [W3C.WD-html5-20110525]
Hickson, I., "HTML5", World Wide Web Consortium LastCall Hickson, I., "HTML5", World Wide Web Consortium LastCall
WD-html5-20110525, May 2011, WD-html5-20110525, May 2011,
<http://www.w3.org/TR/2011/WD-html5-20110525>. <http://www.w3.org/TR/2011/WD-html5-20110525>.
[XEP-0166]
Ludwig, S., Beda, J., Saint-Andre, P., McQueen, R., Egan,
S., and J. Hildebrand, "Jingle", XSF XEP 0166, June 2007.
Appendix A. Change log Appendix A. Change log
This section may be deleted by the RFC Editor when preparing for This section may be deleted by the RFC Editor when preparing for
publication. publication.
A.1. Changes from draft-alvestrand-dispatch-rtcweb-datagram-00 to -01 A.1. Changes from draft-alvestrand-dispatch-rtcweb-datagram-00 to -01
Added section "On interoperability and innovation" Added section "On interoperability and innovation"
Added data confidentiality and integrity to the "data framing" layer Added data confidentiality and integrity to the "data framing" layer
skipping to change at page 23, line 9 skipping to change at page 23, line 21
Changed "gateways" reference to point to the WG document. Changed "gateways" reference to point to the WG document.
A.20. Changes from -15 to -16 A.20. Changes from -15 to -16
None. This is a "keepalive" publication. None. This is a "keepalive" publication.
A.21. Changes from -16 to -17 A.21. Changes from -16 to -17
Addressed review comments by Olle E. Johansson and Magnus Westerlund Addressed review comments by Olle E. Johansson and Magnus Westerlund
A.22. Changes from -17 to -18
Addressed review comments from Sean Turner and Alissa Cooper
Author's Address Author's Address
Harald T. Alvestrand Harald T. Alvestrand
Google Google
Kungsbron 2 Kungsbron 2
Stockholm 11122 Stockholm 11122
Sweden Sweden
Email: harald@alvestrand.no Email: harald@alvestrand.no
 End of changes. 37 change blocks. 
71 lines changed or deleted 90 lines changed or added

This html diff was produced by rfcdiff 1.45. The latest version is available from http://tools.ietf.org/tools/rfcdiff/