IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [AVT] Some comments to subsection 8.1.1 indraft-ietf-avt-rtp-svc-08

<Ye-Kui.Wang@nokia.com> Fri, 28 March 2008 10:26 UTC

Return-Path: <avt-bounces@ietf.org>
X-Original-To: ietfarch-avt-archive@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ietfarch-avt-archive@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B76F43A6800; Fri, 28 Mar 2008 03:26:53 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -101.978
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-101.978 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-1.540, BAYES_00=-2.599, FH_RELAY_NODNS=1.451, HELO_MISMATCH_ORG=0.611, RDNS_NONE=0.1, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id KCCZtEeD12DC; Fri, 28 Mar 2008 03:26:46 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from core3.amsl.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B9BE63A6BAD; Fri, 28 Mar 2008 03:26:46 -0700 (PDT)
X-Original-To: avt@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: avt@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E2EC23A6880 for <avt@core3.amsl.com>; Fri, 28 Mar 2008 03:26:44 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id uTfXQArqebdi for <avt@core3.amsl.com>; Fri, 28 Mar 2008 03:26:44 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mgw-mx06.nokia.com (smtp.nokia.com [192.100.122.233]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id CD6F13A6BDF for <avt@ietf.org>; Fri, 28 Mar 2008 03:26:43 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from esebh106.NOE.Nokia.com (esebh106.ntc.nokia.com [172.21.138.213]) by mgw-mx06.nokia.com (Switch-3.2.6/Switch-3.2.6) with ESMTP id m2SAQNO9007465; Fri, 28 Mar 2008 12:26:35 +0200
Received: from esebh104.NOE.Nokia.com ([172.21.143.34]) by esebh106.NOE.Nokia.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.3959); Fri, 28 Mar 2008 12:26:28 +0200
Received: from vaebe101.NOE.Nokia.com ([10.160.244.11]) by esebh104.NOE.Nokia.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.3959); Fri, 28 Mar 2008 12:26:27 +0200
x-mimeole: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5
Content-class: urn:content-classes:message
MIME-Version: 1.0
Date: Fri, 28 Mar 2008 12:26:23 +0200
Message-ID: <44C96BEE548AC8429828A376231503476953B9@vaebe101.NOE.Nokia.com>
In-Reply-To: <144ED8561CE90C41A3E5908EDECE315C0578B36B@IsrExch01.israel.polycom.com>
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
Thread-Topic: [AVT] Some comments to subsection 8.1.1 indraft-ietf-avt-rtp-svc-08
Thread-Index: AciQVRWAQmMKzNrxS32e1Jdm1uuuCAAAXejwABUwl9AABKewgA==
References: <44C96BEE548AC8429828A3762315034769505B@vaebe101.NOE.Nokia.com> <144ED8561CE90C41A3E5908EDECE315C0578B36B@IsrExch01.israel.polycom.com>
From: Ye-Kui.Wang@nokia.com
To: roni.even@polycom.co.il, csp@csperkins.org
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 28 Mar 2008 10:26:27.0764 (UTC) FILETIME=[2E749F40:01C890BE]
X-Nokia-AV: Clean
Cc: avt@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [AVT] Some comments to subsection 8.1.1 indraft-ietf-avt-rtp-svc-08
X-BeenThere: avt@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: Audio/Video Transport Working Group <avt.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/avt>, <mailto:avt-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
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>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: avt-bounces@ietf.org
Errors-To: avt-bounces@ietf.org

Roni,

But we are talking about session multiplexing, not about a single
stream. 

BR, YK 

>-----Original Message-----
>From: ext Even, Roni [mailto:roni.even@polycom.co.il] 
>Sent: Friday, March 28, 2008 10:13 AM
>To: Wang Ye-Kui (Nokia-NRC/Tampere); csp@csperkins.org
>Cc: avt@ietf.org
>Subject: RE: [AVT] Some comments to subsection 8.1.1 
>indraft-ietf-avt-rtp-svc-08
>
>YK,
>You are talking about a single stream and this is standard RFC 
>3550. If you want it some place add it to RFC 3984 but I would 
>say that no payload mention it.
>Roni
>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: avt-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:avt-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of
>Ye-
>> Kui.Wang@nokia.com
>> Sent: Friday, March 28, 2008 12:10 AM
>> To: csp@csperkins.org
>> Cc: avt@ietf.org
>> Subject: Re: [AVT] Some comments to subsection 8.1.1
>indraft-ietf-avt-rtp-
>> svc-08
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> >> 1. In the following copied text, NTP timestamps of NAL units or 
>> >> operation point representations are mentioned. However, NAL
>> >units are
>> >> not directly assoicated with NTP timestamps, which are only
>directly
>> >> assoicated with RTCP SRs. The NTP timestamp for each NAL
>> >unit must be
>> >> defined.
>> >
>> >The RTCP SR packets define the mapping between the two timelines, 
>> >allowing you to directly derive the NTP timestamps from the RTP 
>> >timestamps in each session. This is the standard RFC 3550 semantics:
>> >nothing specific to this format needs to be defined.
>> >
>> 
>> By defining I meant adding something saying that the NTP 
>timestamp is 
>> derived for each packet (according to RFC 3550) and each NAL unit's
>NTP
>> timestamp is equal to the NTP timestamp of the packet the 
>NAL unit is 
>> carried in. This makes the description better, and I think it is
>aligned
>> with what you said above.
>> 
>> BR, YK
>> _______________________________________________
>> Audio/Video Transport Working Group
>> avt@ietf.org
>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/avt
>
_______________________________________________
Audio/Video Transport Working Group
avt@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/avt

v2.31.3 | Report a Bug | By Email | System Status