RE: [AVT] Offer/answer questions on RFC 4585

Christer
This is my view. The different between AVP and AVPF is in the RTCP
messages so if the receiver understands the SDP of AVPF nothing bad will
happen.
Roni 

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Christer Holmberg [mailto:christer.holmberg@ericsson.com]
> Sent: Tuesday, October 02, 2007 2:13 PM
> To: avt@ietf.org
> Subject: RE: [AVT] Offer/answer questions on RFC 4585
> 
> 
> Hi Roni,
> 
> >>I have a couple of questions on RFC 4585, regarding the usage with
> offer/answer.
> >>
> >>My FIRST question is: are there any TECHNICAL reasons (I know it's
> probably not allowed by RFC 3264) why a user receiving an AVPF offer,
> but doesn't
> >>support it, can't reply with AVP answer (instead of rejecting the
> stream)? My understanding is that if you offer AVPF you still have to
be
> able to do
> >>AVP, so...
> >>(The receiver of course needs to understand the "AVPF" string in the
> SDP)
> 
> >[RE:] I think that is this case the offer will include a=rtcp-fb with
> rtcp-fb-vals. Since the receiver understands AVPF but do not support
any
> feedback
> >message it will remove all rtcp-fb-val in the answers.
> >To me that looks like support of AVP so why do you want to change the
> avpf to avp.
> 
> Ok, if it works that way.
> 
> So, if I have an MGCF/MGW I can do the following:
> 
> - The MGCF answers with AVPF, but without rtcp-fb-val
> 
> - The MGCF sends AVP down to the MGW (e.g using H.248)
> 
> Regards,
> 
> Christer
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Audio/Video Transport Working Group
> avt@ietf.org
> https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/avt

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