Re: [codec] All requirements fulfilled?

Stephen Botzko <stephen.botzko@gmail.com> Thu, 28 July 2011 19:58 UTC

Return-Path: <stephen.botzko@gmail.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 D943111E8163 for <codec@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 28 Jul 2011 12:58:21 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -3.431
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.431 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.167, BAYES_00=-2.599, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1]
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 i0ow96U5uvjs for <codec@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 28 Jul 2011 12:58:21 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-vw0-f44.google.com (mail-vw0-f44.google.com [209.85.212.44]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D84AA21F8A7B for <codec@ietf.org>; Thu, 28 Jul 2011 12:58:20 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by vws12 with SMTP id 12so2740107vws.31 for <codec@ietf.org>; Thu, 28 Jul 2011 12:58:20 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type; bh=05ngstXk2sCbnVqX6ImwMPeabSX9dAZELvEfL7xYaHA=; b=hLwkZl2aJLgVylr3o+OJEMV1v7jIWECXyKezzeiv/lVqecDaWRImPc8llJojDEkXTh kjHTxwsy5v+wb6K5NWPyNWD0637R2PQIfm1RQbiXojYLWC4ONAvSiABdqK1G4Ri9nLhs l4JOsSnr5vZSf8fcoiX3IZ0PwKc/8crsoWXVA=
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.52.69.39 with SMTP id b7mr438246vdu.264.1311883100161; Thu, 28 Jul 2011 12:58:20 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.52.185.71 with HTTP; Thu, 28 Jul 2011 12:58:20 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <CAEW_Rku9TuzmkL8y7F8R2dSoz3mcP09Aq7AyAMx1x9CnJjyqsw@mail.gmail.com>
References: <005001cc4d39$ef62b580$ce282080$@uni-tuebingen.de> <CAEW_RkvwLUgHd7xqEin5uwaomyZm3k6kfYHEomK=OW0RSUKaxw@mail.gmail.com> <CAMC7SJ7oyKcvOfAO+9joLtoYgizHDe83eG7UaUQjDiPCCk_P2w@mail.gmail.com> <CAEW_Rku9TuzmkL8y7F8R2dSoz3mcP09Aq7AyAMx1x9CnJjyqsw@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 28 Jul 2011 15:58:20 -0400
Message-ID: <CAMC7SJ7w=J=KRH6Hafoj2AewMhtuxAm720BOYdSTtBzQFQkdTA@mail.gmail.com>
From: Stephen Botzko <stephen.botzko@gmail.com>
To: Ralph Giles <giles@thaumas.net>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=90e6ba475d4f2c058404a9269681
Cc: codec@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [codec] All requirements fulfilled?
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: Thu, 28 Jul 2011 19:58:22 -0000

In line,
Stephen Botzko

On Thu, Jul 28, 2011 at 3:38 PM, Ralph Giles <giles@thaumas.net> wrote:

> On 28 July 2011 10:30, Stephen Botzko <stephen.botzko@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> >> Is there a standard way
> >> to build multichannel out of a series of mono or stereo streams in RTP
> >> playloads?
> >>
> > rfc 3551 section 4.4
>
> Thanks.
>
> > Though often payload RFCs specify this.
>
> I presume it would need to at least specify the channel map?
>
[SB] You can review RFC 5404 as one example.  Section 4.2 has some
information. There are also some implications on having suitable pointers to
frame starts.  RFC 5404 (for example) also has some other modes
(interleaved, etc), so it needs to ensure that it is clear what the multiple
frames in the packet are for.


>  -r
>