Re: [MMUSIC] Existing missmatch between SDP mux and BUNDLE

Magnus Westerlund <magnus.westerlund@ericsson.com> Fri, 22 September 2017 14:56 UTC

Return-Path: <magnus.westerlund@ericsson.com>
X-Original-To: mmusic@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: mmusic@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id ABE5B13447E for <mmusic@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 22 Sep 2017 07:56:34 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -4.22
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.22 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=-0.01, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=-0.01, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id wS_MtzoSE9lo for <mmusic@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 22 Sep 2017 07:56:32 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from sesbmg23.ericsson.net (sesbmg23.ericsson.net [193.180.251.37]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 1402A13447B for <mmusic@ietf.org>; Fri, 22 Sep 2017 07:56:31 -0700 (PDT)
X-AuditID: c1b4fb25-d31059c000005333-5f-59c5249edeef
Received: from ESESSHC010.ericsson.se (Unknown_Domain [153.88.183.48]) by sesbmg23.ericsson.net (Symantec Mail Security) with SMTP id 32.6F.21299.E9425C95; Fri, 22 Sep 2017 16:56:30 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from [100.94.57.210] (153.88.183.153) by smtps.internal.ericsson.com (153.88.183.48) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.3.352.0; Fri, 22 Sep 2017 16:56:03 +0200
To: Flemming Andreasen <fandreas@cisco.com>, IETF MMUSIC WG <mmusic@ietf.org>
References: <94b38e17-3fbe-2861-cc3a-55ef679a4e64@ericsson.com> <af0c6a6b-c23b-9086-47f1-28d0f6ade7f0@cisco.com>
From: Magnus Westerlund <magnus.westerlund@ericsson.com>
Message-ID: <29a6f779-383c-60d8-db97-c5c63bc7a5d4@ericsson.com>
Date: Fri, 22 Sep 2017 16:56:31 +0200
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.3.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <af0c6a6b-c23b-9086-47f1-28d0f6ade7f0@cisco.com>
Content-Type: multipart/signed; protocol="application/pkcs7-signature"; micalg="sha-256"; boundary="------------ms060203080109030002080901"
X-Originating-IP: [153.88.183.153]
X-Brightmail-Tracker: H4sIAAAAAAAAA+NgFlrIIsWRmVeSWpSXmKPExsUyM2K7ge48laORBsce8lu8v6BrMXX5YxYH Jo8pvzeyeixZ8pMpgCmKyyYlNSezLLVI3y6BK6N3RitjwedGxooHzVuZGxg353cxcnJICJhI fLl/l6WLkYtDSOAIo8TRn6egnE2MEp9brjN2MXJwCAs4SxxZGwnSICLgK/GpYR8LiC0kUCQx /d9URhCbTcBC4uaPRjYQm1fAXqJp529mkFYWAVWJM50OIGFRgRiJn5cesUCUCEqcnPkEzOYU sJV4cPYtO8haZoFuRonr0+5AzdeWaGjqYIU4VEni+rzrLBMY+Wch6Z+FrAckwSwQJjHv4X8m CFtcounLSlYI21biztzdzBC2tsSyha+hbF2JRdtWsGOKW0vM+HWQDcJWlJjS/RCqxlTi9dGP jBC2kcS7PY3sCxh5VjGKFqcWJ+WmGxnrpRZlJhcX5+fp5aWWbGIERtbBLb9VdzBefuN4iFGA g1GJh9dN8GikEGtiWXFl7iFGFaA5jzasvsAoxZKXn5eqJMK7SR4ozZuSWFmVWpQfX1Sak1p8 iFGag0VJnNdx34UIIYH0xJLU7NTUgtQimCwTB6dUA2PsSnm/95OYjaTn/C1e1b+84F5X8uOG z5PfeZakuhf+Px/mcjD/sr2rYNzFZGenZ53hdgc+xfrvtpjxpGyJpIv9xKnH9t/92xCrZnaC a4PwhH/i6QcP9MSLCdp5uPxbJKxftPtLcknQ+iWrPt150yQeOlH+3vZGFfuTnnqq2XaruOMz Z+5NVVZiKc5INNRiLipOBAD6KuMQtAIAAA==
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/mmusic/2Z_eict92qxGVNn_xPo8s4D-9Cg>
Subject: Re: [MMUSIC] Existing missmatch between SDP mux and BUNDLE
X-BeenThere: mmusic@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
Precedence: list
List-Id: Multiparty Multimedia Session Control Working Group <mmusic.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/mmusic>, <mailto:mmusic-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/mmusic/>
List-Post: <mailto:mmusic@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:mmusic-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mmusic>, <mailto:mmusic-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 22 Sep 2017 14:56:35 -0000

Hi,

SDP Mux says:

The attributes and their associated values (if any) in the IDENTICAL
    category MUST be repeated across all the media descriptions under
    multiplexing.

This I interpret as you really MUST include it each and every m= section that are bundled.
While BUNDLE with its updated text says, that you only should include the SDP attribute in the m= sections
that are first on any a=group:BUNDLE line, and not in another unless they have unique
transport information for the case of legacy fallback into individual lines.

Thus, I see SDP-mux require inclusion of the SDP attribute on each m= section in all cases and BUNDLE to
forbid such includion with the m= section in some cases. Thus, in those cases there is a conflict between
two different MUST statements.

Cheers

Magnus



Den 2017-09-22 kl. 15:29, skrev Flemming Andreasen:
> Hi Magnus
>
> Can you elaborate on the mismatch ? I understand they do not say the 
> same thing, but it's not clear to me they are actually in conflict 
> with each other.
>
> How do you interpret the line ("associate" in particular)
> <quote>
> Otherwise the offerer/answerer MUST NOT associate such SDP attributes 
> with the "m=" line.
> <quote>
>
> Is the issue that bundle is relaxing the MUST requirement in bundle ?
>
> Thanks
>
> -- Flemming
>
> On 9/20/17 7:20 AM, Magnus Westerlund wrote:
>>
>> Hi,
>>
>> We are currently in AUTH48 for draft-ietf-avtcore-rfc5285bis which 
>> references Bundle and SDP-Mux as it defines the mux category for its 
>> SDP attributes. As we made some last minute changes to MUX catergory 
>> for the extmap-allowed-mixed attribute we found some text needing 
>> changes. This anyway resulted in us noticing a missmatch between 
>> BUNDLE and sdp-mux.
>>
>> So Bundle (-39) states:
>>
>> 8.1. Mux Category Considerations
>>
>>     When an offerer or answerer associates SDP attributes with a bundled
>>     "m=" line (including any bundle-only "m=" line) associated with a
>>     shared address, IDENTICAL and TRANSPORT mux category SDP attributes
>>     [I-D.ietf-mmusic-sdp-mux-attributes] are associated with the "m="
>>     line only if the "m=" line is also associated with the offerer/
>>     answerer BUNDLE-tag.  Otherwise the offerer/answerer MUST NOT
>>     associate such SDP attributes with the "m=" line.  The rule above
>>     does not apply to a bundled "m=" line associated with a unique
>>     address.
>>
>>
>> However, SDP-mux states:
>>
>> 4.3. Category: IDENTICAL
>>
>>     The attributes and their associated values (if any) in the IDENTICAL
>>     category MUST be repeated across all the media descriptions under
>>     multiplexing.
>>
>> To my understanding the first is correct, but the change in BUNDLE has not been
>> reflected into SDP-mux doc. I assume that is in part due to its approved status.
>> Has the authors tracked the set of changes that are needed due to changes in BUNDLE?
>>
>> Do there exist a text change for this missmatch?
>>
>>
>> Cheers
>>
>> Magnus Westerlund
>>
>> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>> Media Technologies, Ericsson Research
>> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>> Ericsson AB                 | Phone  +46 10 7148287
>> Torshamnsgatan 23           | Mobile +46 73 0949079
>> SE-164 80 Stockholm, Sweden | mailto:magnus.westerlund@ericsson.com
>> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> mmusic mailing list
>> mmusic@ietf.org
>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mmusic
>

-- 

Magnus Westerlund

----------------------------------------------------------------------
Media Technologies, Ericsson Research
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Ericsson AB                 | Phone  +46 10 7148287
Torshamnsgatan 23           | Mobile +46 73 0949079
SE-164 80 Stockholm, Sweden | mailto: magnus.westerlund@ericsson.com
----------------------------------------------------------------------