Re: [AVTCORE] IANAs payload type number registry and RFC 5761

Magnus Westerlund <magnus.westerlund@ericsson.com> Wed, 26 February 2014 07:59 UTC

Return-Path: <magnus.westerlund@ericsson.com>
X-Original-To: avt@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: avt@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 70F5B1A0069 for <avt@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 25 Feb 2014 23:59:42 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.901
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.901 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id DoFR3hWa_yTy for <avt@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 25 Feb 2014 23:59:39 -0800 (PST)
Received: from sesbmg20.ericsson.net (sesbmg20.ericsson.net [193.180.251.56]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 459A71A0081 for <avt@ietf.org>; Tue, 25 Feb 2014 23:59:31 -0800 (PST)
X-AuditID: c1b4fb38-b7f418e000001099-2f-530d9ee1434e
Received: from ESESSHC021.ericsson.se (Unknown_Domain [153.88.253.124]) by sesbmg20.ericsson.net (Symantec Mail Security) with SMTP id A3.79.04249.1EE9D035; Wed, 26 Feb 2014 08:59:29 +0100 (CET)
Received: from [127.0.0.1] (153.88.183.153) by smtp.internal.ericsson.com (153.88.183.83) with Microsoft SMTP Server id 14.2.347.0; Wed, 26 Feb 2014 08:59:28 +0100
Message-ID: <530D9EE0.80600@ericsson.com>
Date: Wed, 26 Feb 2014 08:59:28 +0100
From: Magnus Westerlund <magnus.westerlund@ericsson.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.3.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Kevin Gross <kevin.gross@avanw.com>
References: <52E132E5.40207@ericsson.com> <CALw1_Q0=jmmxmwGkmfLmrz4i6PFhnMWjzC+KB=dj2jsgSpxs5Q@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CALw1_Q0=jmmxmwGkmfLmrz4i6PFhnMWjzC+KB=dj2jsgSpxs5Q@mail.gmail.com>
X-Enigmail-Version: 1.6
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Brightmail-Tracker: H4sIAAAAAAAAA+NgFprILMWRmVeSWpSXmKPExsUyM+Jvje7DebzBBi9OqFm87FnJbvHiUDub A5PHv6vbmT2WLPnJFMAUxWWTkpqTWZZapG+XwJUxZ/5atoIPvBUPb/ayNjBO5O5i5OSQEDCR OND/hAnCFpO4cG89WxcjF4eQwBFGiXdvG6Gc5YwSL9ftYAOp4hXQlLi1YQcriM0ioCoxpf0e C4jNJmAhcfNHI1iNqECwxM4Dvxkh6gUlTs58AlYjIqAu8WjXQ7BtzAJKEnOXvmYGsYUF3CSW Lv4O1iskkCcx7+dKMJtTIFCied4GIJsD6DpxiZ7GIIhWPYkpV1sYIWx5ieats5khWrUlGpo6 WCcwCs1CsnkWkpZZSFoWMDKvYuQoTi1Oyk03MtjECAzWg1t+W+xgvPzX5hCjNAeLkjjvx7fO QUIC6YklqdmpqQWpRfFFpTmpxYcYmTg4pRoYC/vzvWpa5it+Xj2rcOOO3dozvTckmT55eW1h QK57krLU0i735BphvVWy16balV95+ZNvKvOjCafjHU71CP7I29IgHnP2d3Rx2YdVYuGeVjWv lwj0WoS1OU+aZDRPxUzAjXfr9p2TtmYnHOq/FHLowJJDoS4sufeZE7n0Mvcv77A+fl3emy9K iaU4I9FQi7moOBEADd0Z/iQCAAA=
Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/avt/TjbX4evvUfwAwrELRzyeecz4ZSw
Cc: IETF AVTCore WG <avt@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [AVTCORE] IANAs payload type number registry and RFC 5761
X-BeenThere: avt@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
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: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/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: Wed, 26 Feb 2014 07:59:42 -0000

On 2014-02-26 04:03, Kevin Gross wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 23, 2014 at 8:19 AM, Magnus Westerlund
> <magnus.westerlund@ericsson.com <mailto:magnus.westerlund@ericsson.com>>
> wrote:
> 
>     2. The "Reserved for RTCP conflict avoidance" in this table is not up to
>     date. Instead
>     http://www.iana.org/assignments/rtp-parameters/rtp-parameters.xhtml#rtp-parameters-4
>     provides the list of the RTCP types that has actually been registered.
>     Subtract 128 from the RTCP Packet Type value to find the corresponding
>     PT value with collision risk. For further information see RFC 3551 and
>     RFC 5761.
> 
> The critical reference here seems to be RFC 5761 section 4. I'm not sure
> why calling out RFC 3551 is necessary.

Yes, in this case for RTCP conflict avoidance RFC 5761 is the applicable
reference.

However, for the third bullet the inclusion of RFC 3551 is relevant as
that applies when the RTP/RTCP multiplexing is not used.

> 
> Updating the not attached to the registry looks like the right approach
> to me. Thanks Magnus for summarizing this and putting together a proposal.
> 

As I understand the WG are acceptable to this approach. I will take the
opportunity to try to get this in place with IANA during the coming week.

Cheers

Magnus Westerlund

----------------------------------------------------------------------
Services, Media and Network features, Ericsson Research EAB/TXM
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Ericsson AB                 | Phone  +46 10 7148287
Färögatan 6                 | Mobile +46 73 0949079
SE-164 80 Stockholm, Sweden | mailto: magnus.westerlund@ericsson.com
----------------------------------------------------------------------