Hi Peter, On 06/01/2012 07:25 PM, Peter Lemenkov wrote: > My personal opinion is that we should pass the entire SDP (wrapped > into json perhaps) - codec mapping and their parameters, encryption > keys, stun data - this all could be useful for the rtpproxy backend. > Otherwise it looks good.
When taking into account all kinds of use-cases like ICE handling between ICE/non-ICE clients and srtp bridging for webrtc, as well as transcoding for "normal" clients, it makes sense to pass the full SDP body to the rtpproxy and expecting a full SDP body back in response. Maybe some basic wrapping which includes generic and SIP specific values (like the cookie, call-id, tags, branches, IPv4/IPv6 bridging etc) as well as the full SDP for a request, and for responses a status and again the full SDP would be sufficient. That way, we'd get also get rid of certain flags in the rtpproxy module. Andreas
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
_______________________________________________ sr-dev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.sip-router.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sr-dev
