New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Support for DTMF tones A-D #391

Closed
adamroach opened this Issue Nov 12, 2015 · 11 comments

Comments

Projects
None yet
7 participants
@adamroach
Copy link

adamroach commented Nov 12, 2015

The IETF RTCWEB discussions of which DTMF tones to require resulted in a decision to call for only numeric digits, plus "#" and "*". Currently, the WebRTC spec calls for mandatory support for "0 through 9, A through D, #, and *".

These should be harmonized. Lacking a compelling reason to support the seldom-used A through D tones, it seems we should simply remove them from the WebRTC spec.

aboba added a commit that referenced this issue Nov 25, 2015

@aboba aboba self-assigned this Nov 25, 2015

@aboba aboba added the PR exists label Nov 25, 2015

@aboba

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Contributor

aboba commented Nov 28, 2015

I believe that this issue was addressed in PR 402.

aboba added a commit to w3c/ortc that referenced this issue Nov 28, 2015

Fix for WebRTC 1.0 Issue 391 A-D in DTMF
The following issue was filed against WebRTC 1.0 relating to DTMF support: 
w3c/webrtc-pc#391

It was resolved in the following PR: 
w3c/webrtc-pc#402
@rshpount

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link

rshpount commented Nov 28, 2015

There is no reason not to support A-D. Support for A-D DTMF tone generation requires no additional code. These codes, even though they are not present on standard DTMF keypads, are still used by some of the IVR systems for automated entry. It makes no sense to remove already implemented features with no discussion. It probably makes more sense to harmonize in the opposite direction (i.e. change the IETF draft).

@fluffy

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Contributor

fluffy commented Dec 1, 2015

The problem with A-D is they are often blocked and don't work consistently so inviting JS programmers to use them is what the moz guys would call a "foot gun issue". Any place you think you might want them, you probably want something else - like data channel. I think that was part of the discussion that lead to "lets just add what we have a real need for".

@fluffy

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Contributor

fluffy commented Dec 1, 2015

@aboba - FWIW ... I don't think PR 402 fixes this. It leaves me not understanding if the browser is going to do A-D or not. It seems like it might. Or perhaps it might not. That is the worst of all possible worlds for the developer. I'd rather have it be clear that these were going to work or they were not allowed.

@rshpount

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link

rshpount commented Dec 1, 2015

@fluffy I agree the use case for A-D is marginal. But one could argue the same thing about all DTMF tones and that data channel is better tool for practically anything which uses DTMF tones. The only reason DTMF tones are there is legacy interop. From that point of view, I think it makes more sense to have the complete functionality block (RFC 4733 section 3). In the very least removing features should be discussed on IETF list first and once agreement is reached propagated to this specification. If there was a decision reached there, I have surely missed it.

@aboba

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Contributor

aboba commented Dec 2, 2015

@alvestrand alvestrand removed the PR exists label Dec 13, 2015

@alvestrand

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Contributor

alvestrand commented Dec 13, 2015

Leaving this bug open despite merging fixes until IETF RTCWEB discussion of DTMF as part of the WG Last Call for draft-ietf-rtcweb-audio has concluded.

@alvestrand

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Contributor

alvestrand commented Jan 20, 2016

There isn't an issue tracker for rtcweb-audio. @aboba will have to monitor the list on this.

@aboba

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Contributor

aboba commented Feb 4, 2016

Cullen has posted a "Summary of DTMF Issues":
https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/search/?email_list=rtcweb&gbt=1&index=A56A533P48krInTfd2CHWXTctNM

In this note, Adam indicates advocates requiring support for tones A-D:
https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/rtcweb/19mpSa9mNuFEYpzbXRxn9oM0-eM

@aboba

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Contributor

aboba commented Feb 22, 2016

Latest draft of https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-rtcweb-audio now requires support for tones A-D.

aboba added a commit that referenced this issue Feb 22, 2016

Support for DTMF Tones
Fix for Issue #391

@aboba aboba added the PR exists label Feb 22, 2016

@aboba aboba referenced this issue Feb 22, 2016

Closed

DTMF Support #384

@aboba aboba changed the title Remove DTMF tones A-D Support for DTMF tones A-D Feb 22, 2016

@aboba

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Contributor

aboba commented Feb 25, 2016

I think this can be closed now.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment