xcon@ietf.org
[Top] [All Lists]

RE: Can we Kill Audio IM? Not in Charter, anyway (wasRE:[XCON] Whisper

Subject: RE: Can we Kill Audio IM? Not in Charter, anyway wasRE:[XCON] Whisper vs. Sidebar
From: "Brian Rosen"
Date: Wed, 24 Nov 2004 15:38:32 -0500
Inline

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Mike Hammer [mailto:mhammer@xxxxxxxxx]
> Sent: Wednesday, November 24, 2004 12:35 PM
> To: Brian Rosen; 'kae'; xcon@xxxxxxxx
> Subject: RE: Can we Kill Audio IM? Not in Charter, anyway (wasRE:[XCON]
> Whisper vs. Sidebar)
> 
> Agree.  I did not mean to imply that new SIP signaling was required; was
> only referring to the RTP stream that had been initially setup between the
> conference participant and the focus (to distinguish from IM audio).
Right; we don't need a new RTP stream, we use the existing one that runs
between the endpoint and the mixer.  The only thing that changes is the
settings in the mixer.

> 
> Also, just as you would need signaling to indicate that a given input RTP
> stream's audio was targeted to a sidebar v. the main conference, a similar
> (identical?) mechanism would be needed for whispers.  (I'm still on fence
> about whether a whisper is just a sidebar or has differences that require
> separate definition.)
Yes, as I think a whisper is the same as a sidebar except the half duplex
connection for the agents, I would say you use the same signaling.

> 
> I assume that a conference participant in the main conference does not
> hear
> the sidebar audio until he actually takes an action to join (unjoin) the
> sidebar.  I'm not sure if that is true for whisper.
Yes, I would say so.  I believe you invite/accept a whisper request.
I don't think it automatically is a one message from someone else and all of
a sudden he is whispering to you.  I think policy intrudes here however.

> 
> Also, are all sidebars one step removed from the main conference, or can
> there also be sidebars to sidebars?  (how recursive -- enquiring audio
> mixers might like to know)  I had thought that the whisperer goes wherever
> the whisperee goes.
While I would like to just limit you to sidebars of main conferences, I get
hoisted on my own petard when I want to treat whispers as sidebars on that
issue.  You need to get the whisper if you are in a sidebar.  Therefore, I
conclude you can have a sidebar of a sidebar.

Brian
> 
> Mike
> 
> 
> At 11:56 AM 11/24/2004 -0500, Brian Rosen wrote:
> >Mike
> >
> >I agree with you, but please be careful with terminology.
> >We are not going to create a new session for a sidebar.  We will have
> >signaling to create the sidebar (and to tear it down), but I don't think
> >this will take any Session Initiation Protocol signaling (unless a
> sidebar
> >participant is not already part of the main conference; such a
> participant
> >would need to establish a session with the focus, probably using a URI
> which
> >is NOT the conference URI.
> >
> >We do need a term we can use for the state creation associated with a
> >sidebar, but "session" is not a good term.
> >
> >It appears we are heading for having IM "chats" WITHIN the context of a
> >conference as always being session mode (MSRP).  Nothing prevents IM
> outside
> >of the context of the conference even among (a subset of) the same
> >participants.  Sidebars with IM media should be identical to sidebars
> with
> >audio media.
> >
> >Brian
> >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: xcon-bounces@xxxxxxxx [mailto:xcon-bounces@xxxxxxxx] On Behalf
> Of
> > > Mike Hammer
> > > Sent: Wednesday, November 24, 2004 11:30 AM
> > > To: kae; xcon@xxxxxxxx
> > > Subject: RE: Can we Kill Audio IM? Not in Charter, anyway
> (wasRE:[XCON]
> > > Whisper vs. Sidebar)
> > >
> > > Kae,
> > >
> > > For certain applications, I think typing will be too slow.  Better to
> > > leave
> > > whisper as a session setup RTP voice stream kind-of-thing.  That does
> not
> > > preclude IM chats of any type from being defined and used as is, and
> there
> > > is no need to call those chats anything special.
> > >
> > > Mike
> > >
> > > At 10:36 PM 11/23/2004 -0500, kae wrote:
> > > >Agree.
> > > >
> > > > >From my experience as lead engineer in the largest CSP in the
> world, I
> > > >like to suggest not to include whisper mode in the XCON. It is a hugh
> > > >distraction to the conferences if it gets implemented and turned on.
> How
> > > >can you distinguish the voice you are hearding is whisper or someone
> > > >speaking in very low volume?
> > > >
> > > >I think whisper should be implemented as IM text chat not as IM
> voice.
> > > >Even IM text chat, it can be a huge distraction and it should be an
> > > >optional at the best.
> > > >
> > > >Kae
> > >
> > > [snipped -- way too big a message -- caused it to bounce]
> > >
> > >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > XCON mailing list
> > > XCON@xxxxxxxx
> > > https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/xcon
> > >
> 
> 




_______________________________________________
XCON mailing list
XCON@xxxxxxxx
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/xcon

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>