[AVTCORE] RTP/RTCP-mux: Attribute in answer if not included in offer?

Christer Holmberg <christer.holmberg@ericsson.com> Thu, 26 May 2016 20:01 UTC

Return-Path: <christer.holmberg@ericsson.com>
X-Original-To: avt@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: avt@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 60A0012D996; Thu, 26 May 2016 13:01:52 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -4.22
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.22 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=-0.01, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=-0.01, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 2wGv0GwIjDk3; Thu, 26 May 2016 13:01:43 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from sesbmg23.ericsson.net (sesbmg23.ericsson.net []) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id DD58012D970; Thu, 26 May 2016 13:01:40 -0700 (PDT)
X-AuditID: c1b4fb25-f79f26d00000327e-a7-574756226731
Received: from ESESSHC020.ericsson.se (Unknown_Domain []) by sesbmg23.ericsson.net (Symantec Mail Security) with SMTP id F0.1A.12926.22657475; Thu, 26 May 2016 22:01:38 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from ESESSMB209.ericsson.se ([]) by ESESSHC020.ericsson.se ([]) with mapi id 14.03.0294.000; Thu, 26 May 2016 22:01:38 +0200
From: Christer Holmberg <christer.holmberg@ericsson.com>
To: "mmusic@ietf.org" <mmusic@ietf.org>, "avt@ietf.org" <avt@ietf.org>
Thread-Topic: RTP/RTCP-mux: Attribute in answer if not included in offer?
Thread-Index: AdG3iWsAcXNHXXrjTfakEZTp6P/ejw==
Date: Thu, 26 May 2016 20:01:38 +0000
Message-ID: <7594FB04B1934943A5C02806D1A2204B37FF17DE@ESESSMB209.ericsson.se>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
x-originating-ip: []
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_7594FB04B1934943A5C02806D1A2204B37FF17DEESESSMB209erics_"
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Brightmail-Tracker: H4sIAAAAAAAAA+NgFprGIsWRmVeSWpSXmKPExsUyM2K7n65SmHu4wdd9NhYve1ayWyx/eYLR YuryxywWKzYcYHVg8fj7/gOTx7T799k8liz5yRTAHMVlk5Kak1mWWqRvl8CVcfP+TraC61kV 31s3sDUwHo/rYuTkkBAwkfi+ehkrhC0mceHeerYuRi4OIYEjjBIvG44wgSSEBJYwSmy5kNfF yMHBJmAh0f1PGyQsIuAm0dDZwwRSzwxScvXlHHaQGmEBF4klq70gajwljv6dzghh60nsffsI zGYRUJU4feoOO4jNK+ArMeP9LTYQmxHohu+n1oCtZRYQl7j1ZD4TxG0CEkv2nGeGsEUlXj7+ B3WzkkTjkiesEPX5Et0PPrBAzBSUODnzCcsERuFZSEbNQlI2C0kZRFxHYsHuT2wQtrbEsoWv mWHsMwceMyGLL2BkX8UoWpxanJSbbmSsl1qUmVxcnJ+nl5dasokRGFsHt/xW3cF4+Y3jIUYB DkYlHt4EBbdwIdbEsuLK3EOMEhzMSiK8U0Lcw4V4UxIrq1KL8uOLSnNSiw8xSnOwKInz+r9U DBcSSE8sSc1OTS1ILYLJMnFwSjUwZlelbHzRPJOVVeJ3u7hHT8/uIp6lD3JNvPcHejLa/GK0 OVFtv45z7ePzT24F9PZkitx7O+m4xfxs5aqAfbm150o+uMm3/dmkmvTZr+ZRk29Jiy630Xat HJ638466LbCRt9j+bk/crotTYgsubOWpq3t79FX86RCHzJ1zdgb8DDh5dEeZo9B9JZbijERD Leai4kQACDIrcakCAAA=
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/avt/7izo2V3moDHExlie7PaTYSaERXc>
Cc: Magnus Westerlund <magnus.westerlund@ericsson.com>, "Colin Perkins \(csp@csperkins.org\)" <csp@csperkins.org>
Subject: [AVTCORE] RTP/RTCP-mux: Attribute in answer if not included in offer?
X-BeenThere: avt@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17
Precedence: list
List-Id: Audio/Video Transport Core Maintenance <avt.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/avt>, <mailto:avt-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/avt/>
List-Post: <mailto:avt@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:avt-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/avt>, <mailto:avt-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 26 May 2016 20:01:52 -0000

(Sorry for the cross-posting)


There has been a discussion in 3GPP regarding RFC 5761 (RTP/RTCP-mux).

Section 5.1.1 says:

5.1.1.  SDP Signalling

   When the Session Description Protocol (SDP) [8] is used to negotiate
   RTP sessions following the offer/answer model [9], the "a=rtcp-mux"
   attribute (see Section 8) indicates the desire to multiplex RTP and
   RTCP onto a single port.  The initial SDP offer MUST include this
   attribute at the media level to request multiplexing of RTP and RTCP
   on a single port.  For example:

       o=csp 1153134164 1153134164 IN IP6 2001:DB8::211:24ff:fea3:7a2e
       c=IN IP6 2001:DB8::211:24ff:fea3:7a2e
       t=1153134164 1153137764
       m=audio 49170 RTP/AVP 97
       a=rtpmap:97 iLBC/8000

   This offer denotes a unicast voice-over-IP session using the RTP/AVP
   profile with iLBC coding.  The answerer is requested to send both RTP
   and RTCP to port 49170 on IPv6 address 2001:DB8::211:24ff:fea3:7a2e.

   If the answerer wishes to multiplex RTP and RTCP onto a single port,
   it MUST include a media-level "a=rtcp-mux" attribute in the answer.
   The RTP payload types used in the answer MUST conform to the rules in
   Section 4.

   If the answer does not contain an "a=rtcp-mux" attribute, the offerer
   MUST NOT multiplex RTP and RTCP packets on a single port.  Instead,
   it should send and receive RTCP on a port allocated according to the
   usual port-selection rules (either the port pair, or a signalled port
   if the "a=rtcp:" attribute [10] is also included).  This will occur
   when talking to a peer that does not understand the "a=rtcp-mux"

Q: The question is whether it is allowed to include a=rtcp-mux in an answer if the associated offer did NOT contain a=rtcp-mux.

The second last paragraph in the text above does say that, if the answer wishes to do RTP/RTCP-mux, it includes a=rtcp-mux in the answer.

BUT, in my view that is it based on the first paragraph, which assumes a=rtcp-mux is also included in the offer.

Or, am I wrong? Is it allowed to include a=rtcp-mux in the answer, even if it's not included in the offer? If so, how will the offerer then indicate whether mux is used or not.