Indeed, there has already been some coordination between the groups, going back about a year: <http://tools.ietf.org/agenda/84/slides/slides-84-ecrit-0.pdf> <http://tools.ietf.org/id/draft-aboba-rtcweb-ecrit-00.txt>
So my read of the situation is much less dire than James's. As I understand it, the upshot of the initial coordination discussions is that there's not a single, clear "RTCWEB+ECRIT" story. Instead, there are a few ways you can put them together. In the short run, without upgrading PSAPs, RTCWEB VoIP services can bridge RTCWEB signaling to ECRIT-compliant SIP, either at the server, or at the client using something like SIP-over-WebSockets. In the long run, PSAPs can just advertise an RTCWEB service like they would advertise a SIP service today (in LoST). Neither of these is incompatible with RTCWEB or ECRIT as they're being specified today. I expect there are probably some ECRIT considerations that aren't naturally supported in RTCWEB. Things like real-time text come to mind. However, it doesn't seem to me that there's gross incompatibility. --Richard On Sat, May 25, 2013 at 10:18 AM, John C Klensin <john-i...@jck.com> wrote: > > > --On Saturday, May 25, 2013 10:10 +0300 Jari Arkko > <jari.ar...@piuha.net> wrote: > > >... > > I didn't know about the details of the emergency > > communications situation. But it is always difficult to > > balance getting something out early vs. complete. I know how > > much pressure there is on the working groups to keep up with > > things actually happening in the browsers and organisations > > setting up to use this technology. Do you think the retrofit > > will be problematic, and do you have a specific suggestion > > about what should be included today? > > Jari, > > James will probably have a different answer and perspective, but > I suggest that retrofits of security-sensitive features are so > often problematic to make "always" not much of an exaggeration. > > I don't think there is any general solution to the "early vs. > complete" tradeoff [1], nor, as long as we keep trying to deal > with things as collections of disconnected pieces rather than > systems, to the issues created by WGs with significant overlaps > in either scope or technology. What I think we can do is to be > particularly vigilant to be sure that the two WGs are tracking > and frequently reviewing each other's work. At least RTCWEB > and ECRIT are in the same area, which should make that > coordination easier than it might be otherwise. > > john > > > [1] Watch for a note about this that I've been trying to > organize for about two weeks and hope to finish and post this > weekend. > > > >
