Re: [AVT] draft-ietf-avt-evrc-07: Marker Bit
Stephen Casner <casner@acm.org> Thu, 30 August 2001 18:26 UTC
Received: from optimus.ietf.org (ietf.org [132.151.1.19] (may be forged)) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id OAA24500 for <avt-archive@odin.ietf.org>; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 14:26:22 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from optimus.ietf.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by optimus.ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id OAA05991; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 14:26:25 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from ietf.org (odin [132.151.1.176]) by optimus.ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id OAA05960 for <avt@ns.ietf.org>; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 14:26:23 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from mailman.packetdesign.com (dns.packetdesign.com [65.192.41.10]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id OAA24461 for <avt@ietf.org>; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 14:25:03 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from ash.packetdesign.com (ash.packetdesign.com [192.168.0.243]) by mailman.packetdesign.com (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id f7UIP2234970; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 11:25:02 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from casner@acm.org)
Date: Thu, 30 Aug 2001 11:28:21 -0700
From: Stephen Casner <casner@acm.org>
To: Randall Gellens <randy@qualcomm.com>
cc: avt@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [AVT] draft-ietf-avt-evrc-07: Marker Bit
In-Reply-To: <p05100304b7b3112b75d7@[129.46.176.61]>
Message-ID: <20010830111837.J41302-100000@ash.packetdesign.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset="US-ASCII"
Sender: avt-admin@ietf.org
Errors-To: avt-admin@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 1.0
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: Audio/Video Transport Working Group <avt.ietf.org>
X-BeenThere: avt@ietf.org
On Wed, 29 Aug 2001, Randall Gellens wrote: > Previous versions of the draft specified "this payload type MUST > never have the marker bit set". This has been changed to "It is > recommended that the marker bit should not be set". I don't find that text anywhere in draft-ietf-avt-evrc-07.txt. What it says about the marker (M) bit is: The M bit should be set as specified in the applicable RTP profile, for example, RFC 1890. Note that RFC 1890 specifies that if the sender does not suppress silence (i.e., sends a frame on every 20 millisecond interval), the M bit will always be zero. > The change, as > I understand it, is to allow a conforming implementation to use the > marker bit for custom (non-standard) purposes. Definitely not correct. We try hard to keep the use of the marker bit consistent. It would be useful to know what led you to your misunderstanding. The reason that was discussed for a recommendation that the bit not be set is to avoid reducing header compression efficiency. -- Steve _______________________________________________ Audio/Video Transport Working Group avt@ietf.org http://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/avt
- [AVT] draft-ietf-avt-evrc-07: Marker Bit Randall Gellens
- Re: [AVT] draft-ietf-avt-evrc-07: Marker Bit Colin Perkins
- Re: [AVT] draft-ietf-avt-evrc-07: Marker Bit Stephen Casner