4 ms·

Bringing Interoperable Real-Time Communications to the Web

28 points by cleverjake 12y ago

EdSharkey 12y ago
Why would I want to develop to ORTC/WebRTC 1.1 instead of WebRTC 1.0? What is it able to do that WebRTC 1.0 isn't able to do? Is it more or less secure by design? Microsoft IE folks, please implement WebRTC 1.0 as well as your draft standard WebRTC 1.1. As I understand it, Chrome and Firefox can connect via WebRTC 1.0, it would be very cool if IE11 or 12 could claim the same.
- danielki 12y ago
  According to what I've read about WebRTC 1.1 (which, admittedly, isn't as much as I'd like), it sounds like it's backwards-compatible with 1.0. What was said at Google I/O (as quoted by CNET) seems to imply as much ( from http://www.cnet.com/news/reconciliation-draws-closer-for-skype-like-chat-on-the-web/ http://www.cnet.com/news/reconciliation-draws-closer-for-sky... ): > "Is this going to be a schism between the two churches of WebRTC?" he asked. "I wanted to head that off. ORTC will be integrated into WebRTC 1.1. Your existing code is going to keep on working...It's the best of both worlds."
- pthatcherg 12y ago
  Think of WebRTC 1.1 as a slightly lower-level API with more controls for the same components that exist in WebRTC 1.0. For advanced applications, this additional control is very important. For basic applications, the differences in the APIs aren't as significant. One is not more secure than the other. The WebRTC 1.0 API can be implemented on top of WebRTC 1.1. The wire-level protocols are the same, and so a WebRTC 1.1 client should be able to connect to a WebRTC 1.0 client (modulo all the normal interop issues that exist regardless of the API version). It's just a matter of which API the JS sees. It may be that by the time IE implements WebRTC 1.1, there will be JS libraries that implement 1.0 on top of 1.1, so that you could continue using the 1.0 API if you want, even in IE.
  - EdSharkey 12y ago
    Excellent information, thank you.
nashashmi 12y ago
This sucks! I think this a move by Microsoft to render a Skype implementation incompatible on Chrome and Chromebooks. NO browser supports this and Microsoft has openly ignored the more widely implemented WebRTC.
- nashashmi 12y ago
  Or maybe, according to other comments, this is not so bad.

28 points by cleverjake 12y ago

Why would I want to develop to ORTC/WebRTC 1.1 instead of WebRTC 1.0? What is it able to do that WebRTC 1.0 isn't able to do? Is it more or less secure by design? Microsoft IE folks, please implement WebRTC 1.0 as well as your draft standard WebRTC 1.1. As I understand it, Chrome and Firefox can connect via WebRTC 1.0, it would be very cool if IE11 or 12 could claim the same.

danielki 12y ago
According to what I've read about WebRTC 1.1 (which, admittedly, isn't as much as I'd like), it sounds like it's backwards-compatible with 1.0. What was said at Google I/O (as quoted by CNET) seems to imply as much ( from http://www.cnet.com/news/reconciliation-draws-closer-for-skype-like-chat-on-the-web/ http://www.cnet.com/news/reconciliation-draws-closer-for-sky... ): > "Is this going to be a schism between the two churches of WebRTC?" he asked. "I wanted to head that off. ORTC will be integrated into WebRTC 1.1. Your existing code is going to keep on working...It's the best of both worlds."
pthatcherg 12y ago
Think of WebRTC 1.1 as a slightly lower-level API with more controls for the same components that exist in WebRTC 1.0. For advanced applications, this additional control is very important. For basic applications, the differences in the APIs aren't as significant. One is not more secure than the other. The WebRTC 1.0 API can be implemented on top of WebRTC 1.1. The wire-level protocols are the same, and so a WebRTC 1.1 client should be able to connect to a WebRTC 1.0 client (modulo all the normal interop issues that exist regardless of the API version). It's just a matter of which API the JS sees. It may be that by the time IE implements WebRTC 1.1, there will be JS libraries that implement 1.0 on top of 1.1, so that you could continue using the 1.0 API if you want, even in IE.
- EdSharkey 12y ago
  Excellent information, thank you.

nashashmi 12y ago

This sucks! I think this a move by Microsoft to render a Skype implementation incompatible on Chrome and Chromebooks. NO browser supports this and Microsoft has openly ignored the more widely implemented WebRTC.

nashashmi 12y ago
Or maybe, according to other comments, this is not so bad.