Re: [avtext] Proposed text for Alia and other AD's DISCUSS

["Roni Even" <[e-mail]>]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Colin Perkins [mailto:[e-mail]]
> Sent: Wednesday, June 22, 2016 1:55 AM
> To: Stephen Farrell
> Cc: Ben Campbell; [e-mail]; [e-mail]; Huangyihong;
> Alissa Cooper; [e-mail]; [e-mail];
> Mirja Kuehlewind; The IESG; [e-mail];
> Alia Atlas
> Subject: Re: [avtext] Proposed text for Alia and other AD's DISCUSS
> 
> > On 21 Jun 2016, at 23:43, Stephen Farrell <[e-mail]>
> wrote:
> > On 21/06/16 22:48, Colin Perkins wrote:
> >> The other point that’s probably worth noting is that the receiver
> >> knows the traffic is being routed via the middlebox, and explicitly
> >> communicates with that middlebox via the RTCP reception reports it
> >> returns, and possibly also via some non-RTP signalling channel
> >
> > Sorry if I'm taking that out of context, but I don't understand the
> > above.
> >
> > How does the receiver s/w know that it is interacting with a device
> > that is messing about with the content? I understood that it was in
> > fact a requirement here to make it hard for the receiver to be sure of
> > that.
> 
> My point was that the receiver has to be explicitly configured to get the
> media from the splicer, and the splicer can’t interpose itself in the media
> stream unless both sender and receiver chose to use it.
[Roni Even] This may also be a redirect by the source to splicer since this is where all the content is coming from
> 
> > I ask about the receiver s/w above, as clearly the warm body that may
> > have eyeballs pointed at content has no idea that the splicer is in
> > the path.
> >
> >> (the
> >> sender likely offers it no choice but to use the middlebox if it
> >> wants access to the media stream, but that’s a different issue…)
> >
> > Indeed
> >
> > S.
> >
> > .
> >
> 
> 
> 
> --
> Colin Perkins
> https://csperkins.org/
> 
>