Re: [codec] SDP Support for Multiple Packetisation Periods

"Schwarz, Albrecht (Albrecht)" <albrecht.schwarz@alcatel-lucent.com> Fri, 29 July 2011 09:31 UTC

Return-Path: <albrecht.schwarz@alcatel-lucent.com>
X-Original-To: codec@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: codec@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8227321F86A4; Fri, 29 Jul 2011 02:31:47 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -5.916
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.916 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.333, BAYES_00=-2.599, HELO_EQ_FR=0.35, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id EQqZClDYMEDX; Fri, 29 Jul 2011 02:31:46 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from smail2.alcatel.fr (smail2.alcatel.fr [64.208.49.57]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 64D7821F8681; Fri, 29 Jul 2011 02:31:44 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from FRMRSSXCHHUB03.dc-m.alcatel-lucent.com (FRMRSSXCHHUB03.dc-m.alcatel-lucent.com [135.120.45.63]) by smail2.alcatel.fr (8.14.3/8.14.3/ICT) with ESMTP id p6T9Ut6x016219 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=RC4-MD5 bits=128 verify=NOT); Fri, 29 Jul 2011 11:31:37 +0200
Received: from FRMRSSXCHMBSD2.dc-m.alcatel-lucent.com ([135.120.45.50]) by FRMRSSXCHHUB03.dc-m.alcatel-lucent.com ([135.120.45.63]) with mapi; Fri, 29 Jul 2011 11:31:10 +0200
From: "Schwarz, Albrecht (Albrecht)" <albrecht.schwarz@alcatel-lucent.com>
To: Paul Beaumont <paulbeaumont.ietf@gmail.com>, "codec@ietf.org" <codec@ietf.org>
Date: Fri, 29 Jul 2011 11:31:08 +0200
Thread-Topic: [codec] SDP Support for Multiple Packetisation Periods
Thread-Index: AcxNUywcHsRMmhylRbm1zhWdNKc+WgAfjx+A
Message-ID: <5F7BCCF5541B7444830A2288ABBEBC96215F769EF3@FRMRSSXCHMBSD2.dc-m.alcatel-lucent.com>
References: <005001cc4d39$ef62b580$ce282080$@uni-tuebingen.de> <CAEW_RkvwLUgHd7xqEin5uwaomyZm3k6kfYHEomK=OW0RSUKaxw@mail.gmail.com> <A89D56D4-D1D5-4D9D-A0F7-0F1A2C6916AE@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <A89D56D4-D1D5-4D9D-A0F7-0F1A2C6916AE@gmail.com>
Accept-Language: de-DE, en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
acceptlanguage: de-DE, en-US
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.64 on 155.132.188.80
Cc: mmusic <mmusic@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [codec] SDP Support for Multiple Packetisation Periods
X-BeenThere: codec@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: Codec WG <codec.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/codec>, <mailto:codec-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/codec>
List-Post: <mailto:codec@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:codec-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/codec>, <mailto:codec-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 29 Jul 2011 09:31:47 -0000

Paul,

1) SDP => IETF MMUSIC

2) ptime problem statement ("well known"), see

Multiple Packetization Times in the Session Description Protocol (SDP):
Problem Statement, Requirements & Solution
draft-garcia-mmusic-multiple-ptimes-problem-03.txt
http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-garcia-mmusic-multiple-ptimes-problem-03

3) Solution:
= revised SDP Offer/Answer
see
a) SDP) Capability Negotiation RFC 5939
   http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc5939
b) SDP Media Mapabilities Negotiation
   http://tools.ietf.org/wg/mmusic/draft-ietf-mmusic-sdp-media-capabilities/

Thus, revised SDP Offer/Answer must be used (instead of legacy SDP Offer/Answer RFC 3264).

-Albrecht

 

> -----Original Message-----
> From: codec-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:codec-bounces@ietf.org] 
> On Behalf Of Paul Beaumont
> Sent: Donnerstag, 28. Juli 2011 19:31
> To: codec@ietf.org
> Subject: [codec] SDP Support for Multiple Packetisation Periods
> 
> All
> 
> Apologies, being first time to IETF and its mailing lists, if 
> this is not the right mailing list to post this request to.
> 
> On initial inspection it looks like it is not possible to 
> specify in SDP the specific packetisation period associated 
> with a codec that is available through negotiation. Specific 
> case I am concerned with is to support (1) G.711 @ PP=10ms 
> and (2) G.711 @ PP=20ms; prioritised in that order. The ptime 
> parameter would appear to apply to both.
> 
> Please can you advise where I should submit this question or 
> if this is the right frum then whether the above observation 
> is correct and any supplemental information/comments you may have? 
> 
> Thanks
> Paul Beaumont
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> codec mailing list
> codec@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/codec
>