WebRTC Standards overview.

1,294 views
1,214 views

Published on

A business person's overview of the state of WebRTC standards as at Nov 2013.

Published in: Technology
0 Comments
1 Like
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

No Downloads
Views
Total views
1,294
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
81
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
26
Comments
0
Likes
1
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

WebRTC Standards overview.

  1. 1. 1 11/24/2013
  2. 2. Session Abstract This session will start with a quick non-technical update on the standards and then focus on regulatory issues. With many recent regulatory moves around VoIP, government recording, and other areas, understanding the regulatory response to WebRTC is a critical part of the overall strategy, especially for Service Providers. 2 11/24/2013
  3. 3. Standards Overview & Regulatory Issues Session B2-2 E. Brent Kelly, Ph.D. President and Principal Analyst KelCor, Inc. Vice President and Principal Analyst, Constellation Research bkelly@kelcor.com; brent@constellationr.com twitter: @ebkell 3 11/24/2013
  4. 4. Speakers • Tim Panton – Director – Westhawk Ltd • Martha Buyer – Principal – Law Offices of Martha Buyer 4 11/24/2013
  5. 5. Collaboration and Conferencing Applications Brent Kelly Title Company Email Twitter, etc Put the moderator logo here at this size – remove this box 5 11/24/2013
  6. 6. Tim Panton Director Westhawk Ltd WEBRTC STANDARDS OVERVIEW 6 11/24/2013
  7. 7. WebRTC definition • • • • • • Realtime voice / video /data browser based no plugins secure interoperable 7 11/24/2013
  8. 8. Standards • • • • • IETF W3C Loosely based on pre-existing standards $100s Millions of IPR - donated Google, Cisco, Mozilla, Skype, Tropo, ATT, E///, Luc ent etc. 8 11/24/2013
  9. 9. Big Picture WebServer HTTP signaling HTTP signaling Peer to Peer Media 9 11/24/2013
  10. 10. Protocol Standards (IETF) The Internet Engineering Taskforce (IETF) has responsibility for the wire protocols used in RTCWeb 10 11/24/2013
  11. 11. Signaling Standards • None • It is up to the javascript in the browser to do whatever is needed. 11 11/24/2013
  12. 12. Media Standards (rtcweb) • Many • Mostly pre-existing standards combined…. • STUN • ICE • TURN • DTLS • SRTP • RTCP • OPUS • ULAW • ??? 12 11/24/2013
  13. 13. Why so many ? The network environment of a web browser is not the same as a desk phone • Security – hostile LANs (coffee shops/hotels) • Variability – home networks, wifi/3g • Programmability – Javascript is dynamically loadable The rtcweb stack of media standards addresses these differences 13 11/24/2013
  14. 14. IETF successes Rtcweb • works over many networks • Is sufficiently well defined to be implemented from the spec alone (tropo) • Interop is possible via gateways to legacy • Devices can talk with browsers • Opus codec and security is leading edge • Data channel has huge implications 14 11/24/2013
  15. 15. Opinion - devices There is a huge market for devices and apps that speak rtcweb, aren’t browsers but do RT media/data with them. • Baby monitors • Body scanners • Toasters ( itoast ) • Video mixers • Prison videophones • Quadacoptors This may be the biggest legacy of the webRTC effort. 15 11/24/2013
  16. 16. IETF failures Rtcweb • Fails in some networks • Overly complex • No selected video codec(s) - yet 16 11/24/2013
  17. 17. Opinion – video codecs Background : • H264 established player with paid for licensing • VP8 new kid with free usage model It seems likely we will reach a compromise. Browsers will support both, devices will support which ever they choose. 17 11/24/2013
  18. 18. API Standards (W3C) W3C has responsibility for the Javascript API • Methods • DataStructures exposed in the browser and used by the web pages. 18 11/24/2013
  19. 19. API Standards • • • • getUserMedia() RTCPeerConnection() <video> - extended to support realtime RTCSessionDescription() 19 11/24/2013
  20. 20. W3C successes • Supported in 3 of the top 5 browsers (Chrome, Firefox, Opera) • No mandatory signaling so can adapt to fit use case • API is usable • DataChannel mimics websockets • Leverages the webGL and webAudio APIs 20 11/24/2013
  21. 21. Opinion – WebGL etc Availability of webGL and webAudio to web programmers will enable significant innovation. All those broadcast-only audio/video tricks – available in realtime in a browser. Combined with P2P datachannel – we may see new application classes emerge. 21 11/24/2013
  22. 22. W3C failures • Not yet supported in 2 of the top 5 browsers (IE, Safari) • No accommodation for mobile • Use of SDP as a datastructure was a mistake • API is so ugly it will spawn a thousand wrapper libraries • Identity support could be better 22 11/24/2013
  23. 23. Opinion – ORTC etc. Safari and IE will release ‘compatible’ webRTC offerings once 1.0 standard is settled. (<1 year?) Weaknesses in the 1.0 API will drive rapid development/adoption of a 2.0 standard 2.0 Standard will be more object oriented and not based on SDP but largely compatible with 1.0 (via polyfills) – see OTRC for an example. 23 11/24/2013
  24. 24. TLDR; Standards effort has succeeded despite complex 2 org structure. Already deployed in close to final form on most desktops. (~1BN) Weakness in mobile and SDP dependence will be addressed in future 2.0 standard. 24 11/24/2013
  25. 25. Questions? Tim Panton. twitter: @steely_glint Email: thp@westhawk.co.uk 25 11/24/2013

×