Re: [AVT] Comments on draft-ietf-text-red-00.txt

Hi,

I have had some off-line discussion regarding the MIME registration 
problem for text/RED. Know understanding the intention having the 
ordering requirement on RFC 2198 being firm for the "pt" list, I would 
propose the following text change for the "pt" list:

"pt: a comma-separated ordered list enumerating the primary, secondary, 
etc., encoding's RTP payload types in accordance with RFC 2198.  Because 
comma is ..."

Then one addition to the SDP section (4) is also needed in my opinion. 
Please add the following text where appropriate.

"For each redundancy payload type defined the ordering of the primary, 
and redundancy encoding(s) are fixed. If more than one combination of 
primary, and redundancy encoding(s) are desired, multiple redundancy 
payload types needs to be defined."

Then only the last issue below remains to be resolved as I see it.

Cheers

Magnus

Magnus Westerlund wrote:

>
>>>>     
>>>
>>> When you are in the SDP domain, you SHOULD NOT / SHALL NOT use the
>>> pt=content-type structure at all. As the information is available in
>>>   
>>
>> the
>>  
>>
>>> SDP as defined PT. Therefore you only need to reference these PTs. So
>>> when having SDP should you in fact remove all of these pt=content-type
>>> declarations and only use PTs in the list?
>>>
>>> I would also like to point out that the this declaration of
>>> "dynamic-payload-type "=" content-type" is not sufficiently clear. For
>>> RTP payload formats using parameters to configure this, this string is
>>> insufficient unless the parameter list can be included in the
>>> content-type part.
>>>   
>>
>>
>> Ah, I understand.  As I mentioned above, this follows the example in RFC
>> 3555, which also does not go into discussion on this (as far as I know).
>> I
>> assume the reason for that was simply that the entire focus was on SDP,
>> anyway, with little focus on MIME, really.
>>
>> In any case, I can add text in this regard, but I need some guidance as
>> to
>> what we should have inserted to make this clearer.
>>
>>  
>>
> I would definitely like to have some more input from Colin and others 
> about how this problem should be resolved.
>

-- 

Magnus Westerlund 

Multimedia Technologies, Ericsson Research EAB/TVA/A
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Ericsson AB                | Phone +46 8 4048287
Torshamsgatan 23           | Fax   +46 8 7575550
S-164 80 Stockholm, Sweden | mailto: magnus.westerlund@ericsson.com

_______________________________________________
Audio/Video Transport Working Group
avt@ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/avt