|
|
Aki, Eric,
I probably just missed this, so I apologize for jumping in the
middle of this, but it is not clear to me what the definition of
whisper is.
One example I have seen is TTS (a VXML engine) is used to send someone a voice
message (your boss needs you now). This is not a two way conversation.
A whisper implies the recipient hears the message while still participating
in the main conference. If the mixer does not send the whisper to the
user (it is a separate conversation) it limits the devices that will be
able to actually receive the whisper (not all devices are capable of
endpoint mixing).
Thanks
Dave
> -----Original Message-----
> From: xcon-bounces@xxxxxxxx [mailto:xcon-bounces@xxxxxxxx]On Behalf Of
> Aki Niemi
> Sent: Thursday, November 11, 2004 4:08 PM
> To: ext Eric Burger
> Cc: XCON-IETF
> Subject: Re: [XCON] barnes-xcon-framework-00 comments
>
>
> ext Eric Burger wrote:
> > While the analogy works for text messages, it does not for whisper.
> > One does not send a "one-shot" packet of voice. One establishes a
> > voice channel, has a conversation, and disconnects.
>
> Fair enough. I originally suggested that private messages be
> treated as
> strictly an instant messaging specific feature. This was
> before Seoul, i
> think, and back then some people felt it needed to be a more general
> feature than that.
>
> That said,
>
> > This is why the analogy doesn't hold, and all we're doing by
> > distinguishing between sidebars and whispers is introducing
> > complexity with no benefit.
>
> If you had a way to mark your voice packets as "private" (and indicate
> to whom they are to be sent) in the same way that, say, a PRIVSEND
> method in MSRP would mark the instant message private, *and* the mixer
> knew how to handle such voice packets, then private mesages would be
> exactly the same in voice as in IM.
>
> But that *is* complex, I agree. So maybe private messages
> simply make no
> sense in voice. Still, you can't draw a conclusion from this
> that rules
> out private messages for all other media.
>
> I can propose some text that points out the limitations of
> certain media
> to enable private messages in the framework draft. We can
> also drop the
> name "whispering" and replace it with "private messaging".
>
> Cheers,
> Aki
>
> >
> >>-----Original Message-----
> >>From: Aki Niemi [mailto:aki.niemi@xxxxxxxxx]
> >>Sent: Thursday, November 11, 2004 10:21 AM
> >>To: ext Eric Burger
> >>Cc: XCON-IETF
> >>Subject: Re: [XCON] barnes-xcon-framework-00 comments
> >>
> >>
> >>Inline.
> >>
> >>ext Eric Burger wrote:
> >>
> >>>I don't agree. Inline:
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>>-----Original Message-----
> >>>>From: Aki Niemi [mailto:aki.niemi@xxxxxxxxx]
> >>>>Sent: Monday, November 08, 2004 5:22 PM
> >>>>To: ext Cullen Jennings
> >>>>Cc: Chris Boulton; XCON-IETF
> >>>>Subject: Re: [XCON] barnes-xcon-framework-00 comments
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>Inline.
> >>>>
> >>>>ext Cullen Jennings wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>>The whisper stuff in this context seems new - seems like
> >>>>
> >>>>the case where A
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>>and B want to have a private conversation while listening
> >>>>
> >>>>to the main
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>>conversation should be handled as a sidebar with just two
> >>>>
> >>>>participants. The
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>>other context of whisper where a announcement server
> >>>>
> >>>>injects a messages in
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>>whisper mode makes sense to me.
> >>>>
> >>>>Surely, a sidebar can be used to set up a "private"
> >>
> >>conversation. But
> >>
> >>>>imagine such a private sidebar of n participants - there are
> >>>>scenarios
> >>>>where any two out of those n would like to send private
> >>
> >>notes between
> >>
> >>>>each other. If this requires a one-2-one sidebar established,
> >>>>this very
> >>>>quickly means a full mesh of sidebars, which is not very
> convenient.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>What is the difference between a full mesh of sidebars and
> >>
> >>a full mesh of
> >>
> >>>whispers? I would offer that it is identical.
> >>
> >>Well, if a whisper entailed setting up a lasting context
> between the
> >>whisperer and the target yes, but this is not what I'm suggesting.
> >>
> >>If you submit to the idea that a sidebar has a "context", and
> >>whispers
> >>are context-less because they are sent *within* the current
> context,
> >>then they are not at all identical.
> >>
> >>Think of this in terms of instant messaging. I have two types of
> >>messages I can send to the conference (chat room): public
> >>ones that get
> >>delivered to all current participants, and private ones that get
> >>delivered to only one or some of those participants. Doing
> >>this in MSRP
> >>is trivial, and does not require sidebars, calls or mucking
> >>with mixer
> >>settings.
> >>
> >>
> >>>>This is the main difference between a whisper and a sidebar.
> >>>>The former
> >>>>is a private message sent within the existing context
> >>>>(conference or a
> >>>>sidebar), whereas the latter is a new context altogether.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>So whisper:sidebar::MESSAGE:MSRP ?
> >>
> >>No. To use your SAT syntax,
> whisper:sidebar::PRIVMSG:INVITE. See IRC.
> >>
> >>
> >>>Let's not go there! If you want a private conversation,
> >>
> >>why not just "call"
> >>
> >>>the person? If they have a Conference Aware UA, they most
> >>
> >>likely have a
> >>
> >>>multiple appearance UA that can do local whisper.
> >>
> >>So your suggestion is that I need to set up a full mesh of
> "calls" so
> >>that I can send private messages?
> >>
> >>Cheers,
> >>Aki
> >>
> >
> >
>
> _______________________________________________
> XCON mailing list
> XCON@xxxxxxxx
> https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/xcon
>
_______________________________________________
XCON mailing list
XCON@xxxxxxxx
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/xcon
|
|