IETF Logo Mail Archive

[AVTCORE] BUNDLE question - relationship to PR-Answer?

Harald Alvestrand <harald@alvestrand.no> Tue, 21 April 2026 06:03 UTC

Return-Path: <harald@alvestrand.no>
X-Original-To: avt@mail2.ietf.org
Delivered-To: avt@mail2.ietf.org
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail2.ietf.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 87772DFF1F5A for <avt@mail2.ietf.org>; Mon, 20 Apr 2026 23:03:07 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=ietf.org; s=ietf1; t=1776751387; bh=1NUMuM07XKpgh5lpp/rC9die7mrz/LLG8XQvFIw8b+k=; h=Date:To:From:Subject; b=MjZuY69uIwVIlSJDpcXcWxn+PzIPnLEtJdQHl4cQqr+aM3Ixdjq5mTSR9Dp0911Sh X3yDqXBdRE3RNkFVVmvplW2FtMI17JEbkNHetPl6pZ8Kpwfx/XNdXLG+xuW99IH03o al6Q64g120quBG9qewX74EKao8cSYsQp8cNgnBbE=
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at ietf.org
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: 0.8
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.8 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_50=0.8, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Received: from mail2.ietf.org ([166.84.6.31]) by localhost (mail2.ietf.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id IzdBl1uyOKAV for <avt@mail2.ietf.org>; Mon, 20 Apr 2026 23:03:07 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from smtp.alvestrand.no (smtp.alvestrand.no [IPv6:2a01:4f9:c010:a44b::1]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature ECDSA (P-256) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by mail2.ietf.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E9181DFF1F55 for <avt@ietf.org>; Mon, 20 Apr 2026 23:03:06 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [192.168.3.231] (46-227-153-131.customer.obosnett.no [46.227.153.131]) by smtp.alvestrand.no (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id C338A4CC4D for <avt@ietf.org>; Tue, 21 Apr 2026 08:03:05 +0200 (CEST)
Message-ID: <a758d4db-6744-4998-843d-df5dc4638c16@alvestrand.no>
Date: Tue, 21 Apr 2026 08:03:05 +0200
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
Content-Language: en-US
To: IETF AVTCore WG <avt@ietf.org>
From: Harald Alvestrand <harald@alvestrand.no>
Autocrypt: addr=harald@alvestrand.no; keydata= xjMEZ0mTQBYJKwYBBAHaRw8BAQdAggX3PGSWWM78d4EKr8BjFdZhh4Vk73S5/eW3LW8Zpg3N KEhhcmFsZCBBbHZlc3RyYW5kIDxoYXJhbGRAYWx2ZXN0cmFuZC5ubz7CjwQTFggANxYhBKML Oen7rVm4eJicvjofELrAkOUSBQJnSZNABQkFo5qAAhsDBAsJCAcFFQgJCgsFFgIDAQAACgkQ Oh8QusCQ5RLllgEAwXOwOahi4l5QZ56KEAiSE5NatgPtzG4/YLTFDQL7VnsA/jLF3aqVpJuT Rx1I6XL7pl0rqPgA3YFkmhvxJicnT+wMzjgEZ0mTQBIKKwYBBAGXVQEFAQEHQC/TfFw6aX0M /CoUaD3Um5QWJ6Io2sfhxqvylJjEipFmAwEIB8J+BBgWCAAmFiEEows56futWbh4mJy+Oh8Q usCQ5RIFAmdJk0AFCQWjmoACGwwACgkQOh8QusCQ5RJe2AD8CdqXoVNNiPHtx+KvfsyRZriN v5U5kNC9Bwzeb1TQ/cwA/0e2MkUpxn1bCVMYfZ7mMyVb14YWJRxY445SVphDBdwP
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID-Hash: MB3NZBH2YSGPH7T2SVR4ZQKSO46WAFFT
X-Message-ID-Hash: MB3NZBH2YSGPH7T2SVR4ZQKSO46WAFFT
X-MailFrom: harald@alvestrand.no
X-Mailman-Rule-Misses: dmarc-mitigation; no-senders; approved; emergency; loop; banned-address; member-moderation; header-match-avt.ietf.org-0; nonmember-moderation; administrivia; implicit-dest; max-recipients; max-size; news-moderation; no-subject; digests; suspicious-header
X-Mailman-Version: 3.3.9rc6
Precedence: list
Subject: [AVTCORE] BUNDLE question - relationship to PR-Answer?
List-Id: Audio/Video Transport Core Maintenance <avt.ietf.org>
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/avt/_pKs3iZX-jmLiOurbUlnL31zr1o>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/avt>
List-Help: <mailto:avt-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Owner: <mailto:avt-owner@ietf.org>
List-Post: <mailto:avt@ietf.org>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:avt-join@ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:avt-leave@ietf.org>

I recently tangled with an AI about how to interpret RFC 8843 (BUNDLE) 
in the presence of PR-Answer.

The question is whether, if we get

Offer: BUNDLE(a, b)
PR-Answer: BUNDLE(a, b)
Answer: No bundle

The AI claimed that 7.3.2 "moving a media description out of a bundle 
group" meant that the answer needed to be rejected, since you can't move 
something out of a bundle in an answer.

I claim that an answer in have-remote-pranswer state should override the 
pr-answer bundling.

Is there a valid use case for wanting the spec to be read the way I 
claim? (The code is more complex if we want that variant to work....)

Harald

v2.46.0 | Report a Bug | By Email | System Status