Binary Floor Control Protocol (BFCP)

[Maxime Marchand]

Hi,

I was wondering if anybody knew about the time frame for BFCP support in WebRTC?

Any links or info would be appreciated!

Thanks,

Maxime

[Iñaki Baz Castillo]

2015-02-18 19:50 GMT+01:00 Maxime Marchand <maxime.a...@gmail.com>:
> I was wondering if anybody knew about the time frame for BFCP support in
> WebRTC?

No. Implement it over DataChannels or over WebSocket. WebRTC is not
about in-the-wire signaling protocols.


--
Iñaki Baz Castillo
<i...@aliax.net>

[Maxime Marchand]

Thanks Inaki,

BFCP is part of the SDP and signalling handshake. I would need an SDP that can support an "m=application <port> TCP/BFCP" line along with the associated "a" lines.

I believe this should be part of the WebRTC implementation if we want WebRTC to be part of the IMS world and support that aspect of conferencing.

Is it confirmed that BFCP will NOT be part of WebRTC?

Thanks again!

[Iñaki Baz Castillo]

2015-02-18 20:13 GMT+01:00 Maxime Marchand <maxime.a...@gmail.com>:
> BFCP is part of the SDP and signalling handshake.

Not entirely true. BFCP is defined as a standalone protocol. The fact
that its data (floor IDs, etc) can be transmitted via SIP+SDP is just
an "usage" of BFCP. But remember that WebRTC is not about SIP.

> I would need an SDP that
> can support an "m=application <port> TCP/BFCP" line along with the
> associated "a" lines.

Yes. You can mangle and parse your SDP in order to add and retrieve
the BFCP stream:

https://www.npmjs.com/package/sdp-transform

The browser's WebRTC engine should just ignore/reject the BFCP media
stream (by setting its port to 0). That should work, and if not, it
should be reported to the browser vendor.

Anyhow, the fact that WebRTC uses SDP does not mean that it must
implement any SDP based stream.

> I believe this should be part of the WebRTC implementation if we want WebRTC
> to be part of the IMS world and support that aspect of conferencing.

I don't think we really want WebRTC to be part of the IMS world.
That's not the purpose of WebRTC.

> Is it confirmed that BFCP will NOT be part of WebRTC?

For sure.

[Maxime Marchand]

Thanks for the answer!

--

---
You received this message because you are subscribed to a topic in the Google Groups "discuss-webrtc" group.
To unsubscribe from this topic, visit https://groups.google.com/d/topic/discuss-webrtc/4u7-GhsO4NM/unsubscribe.
To unsubscribe from this group and all its topics, send an email to discuss-webrt...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

[Simon Perreault]

On Wed, Feb 18, 2015 at 3:33 PM, Iñaki Baz Castillo <i...@aliax.net> wrote:

> Is it confirmed that BFCP will NOT be part of WebRTC?

For sure.

Well, nothing prevents Maxime (or anyone else) from just writing an IETF draft about how to do BFCP over WebRTC. I think the number of interested people wouldn't be zero (but admittedly probably not very high).

Simon

[Maxime Marchand]

I have an alternative solution to my problem already. I was investigating and looking into simplifying the solution long term by removing the protocol conversion that is needed at the moment.

@Simon Sometimes, it does feel like I am the only person in the world trying out some of my use cases with WebRTC :(

[Iñaki Baz Castillo]

2015-02-18 22:10 GMT+01:00 Maxime Marchand <maxime.a...@gmail.com>:
> @Simon Sometimes, it does feel like I am the only person in the world trying
> out some of my use cases with WebRTC :(

Well, not true. The problem here is that BFCP has no relationship at
all with WebRTC (other than the fact that WebRTC uses SDP and BFCP can
also use SDP).

I already told you how to signal BFCP required info within the SDP.
The missing point is how do you plan to implement the BFCP protocol
itself. If you expect that browsers should implement it... wrong. But
you can implement BFCP on top of DataChannel or WebSocket (by using
binary BFCP or some kind of "JSON-based BFCP" as I use).

[Gonzalo Salgueiro (gsalguei)]

> On Feb 18, 2015, at 1:59 PM, Iñaki Baz Castillo <i...@aliax.net> wrote:
>
> 2015-02-18 19:50 GMT+01:00 Maxime Marchand <maxime.a...@gmail.com>:
>> I was wondering if anybody knew about the time frame for BFCP support in
>> WebRTC?
>
> No. Implement it over DataChannels or over WebSocket. WebRTC is not
> about in-the-wire signaling protocols.

https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-bfcpbis-bfcp-websocket

Cheers,

Gonzalo

>
>
> --
> Iñaki Baz Castillo
> <i...@aliax.net>
>

> --
>
> ---
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "discuss-webrtc" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to discuss-webrt...@googlegroups.com.

[Iñaki Baz Castillo]

2015-02-18 20:04 GMT+01:00 Gonzalo Salgueiro (gsalguei) <gsal...@cisco.com>:
>> No. Implement it over DataChannels or over WebSocket. WebRTC is not
>> about in-the-wire signaling protocols.
>
> https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-bfcpbis-bfcp-websocket

Oh yes! my boss is an author of that spec :)

The point is that is not related to WebRTC at all (and it shouldn't).