Re: [MMUSIC] draft-ietf-mmusic-sctp-sdp-07 SCTP SDP syntax question

Paul Kyzivat <pkyzivat@alum.mit.edu> Wed, 01 October 2014 23:04 UTC

Return-Path: <pkyzivat@alum.mit.edu>
X-Original-To: mmusic@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: mmusic@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 610251A86F9 for <mmusic@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 1 Oct 2014 16:04:56 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.235
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.235 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, SPF_SOFTFAIL=0.665] autolearn=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 KT7er0twhn8v for <mmusic@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 1 Oct 2014 16:04:54 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from resqmta-po-10v.sys.comcast.net (resqmta-po-10v.sys.comcast.net [IPv6:2001:558:fe16:19:96:114:154:169]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B161F1A8821 for <mmusic@ietf.org>; Wed, 1 Oct 2014 16:04:54 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from resomta-po-14v.sys.comcast.net ([96.114.154.238]) by resqmta-po-10v.sys.comcast.net with comcast id xz4Y1o00458ss0Y01z4ujU; Wed, 01 Oct 2014 23:04:54 +0000
Received: from Paul-Kyzivats-MacBook-Pro.local ([50.138.229.151]) by resomta-po-14v.sys.comcast.net with comcast id xz4t1o0063Ge9ey01z4tdc; Wed, 01 Oct 2014 23:04:53 +0000
Message-ID: <542C8895.6080408@alum.mit.edu>
Date: Wed, 01 Oct 2014 19:04:53 -0400
From: Paul Kyzivat <pkyzivat@alum.mit.edu>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.7; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.6.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: mmusic@ietf.org
References: <542A9E4B.2050608@nteczone.com> <542AA680.1030809@nteczone.com> <2AB21794-B955-48A3-ACC1-B0D838354BFA@ericsson.com> <542BB0F7.3090608@nteczone.com> <7594FB04B1934943A5C02806D1A2204B1D46209F@ESESSMB209.ericsson.se> <786615F3A85DF44AA2A76164A71FE1AC337882@FR711WXCHMBA03.zeu.alcatel-lucent.com> <7594FB04B1934943A5C02806D1A2204B1D462276@ESESSMB209.ericsson.se> <542C8452.1030206@nteczone.com>
In-Reply-To: <542C8452.1030206@nteczone.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=comcast.net; s=q20140121; t=1412204694; bh=uKzstSpV36FtlbtjspJful+WnicvurOsd+nWTW+k2Xw=; h=Received:Received:Message-ID:Date:From:MIME-Version:To:Subject: Content-Type; b=AITaOz819PHiNtUDbyYm8dcD23bw4VdVQR1pYFNfGDGjJXO32g7we3/JzQVd36nRu +EQ0oUyvE6XzdLfMWvhvCBmokeszXDqSLICjYpwsWbmzlav2SM26HbFyvCEds29uJ3 Fog1NoYgI8iTI+pP5uELPo2T2BRc3JYTN0oJ3HQm+JfR0BAM9FgfTjPXIWbAUkL4Ze etUq7BSMtZY7aR1UTZ4IMFdmfDLKeIfW+sPXv2wpEYfDxZVA50rg/JBhs7tyxJhwCJ Rd0h/UFcdUpdvfuLKboPqxOFtdJPWR0OmHNYQWlbXesMkrF98Tvpzo07ak3XOvv+Qb 6q+W++yzngNNQ==
Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/mmusic/CQ6w90ji0IM0NbcovmNyJHdPxnw
Subject: Re: [MMUSIC] draft-ietf-mmusic-sctp-sdp-07 SCTP SDP syntax question
X-BeenThere: mmusic@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
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: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/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: Wed, 01 Oct 2014 23:04:56 -0000

On 10/1/14 6:46 PM, Christian Groves wrote:
> Hello Christer and Salvatore,
>
> I'm happy to use to m-lines. I think it would be good to have something
> in the draft describing the usage of multiple DTLS/SCTP m-lines (with
> the same port) so that its clear that's the intention.

The thing is - it would be bad to give an example using bundle while 
there is no definition of how bundle works for that. (It is not included 
in the bundle spec.)

That would mean adding the interaction with bundle into this draft, or 
in a new draft. While that is possible, do we want to take that on now?

This would be a good time for Christer to chime in. :-)

	Thanks,
	Paul

> Christian
>
> On 1/10/2014 10:45 PM, Christer Holmberg wrote:
>> My mistake: I meant SCTP association, which then can contains multiple
>> SCTP streams.
>>
>> Sorry for the confusion.
>>
>> Regards,
>>
>> Christer
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Schwarz, Albrecht (Albrecht)
>> [mailto:albrecht.schwarz@alcatel-lucent.com]
>> Sent: 1. lokakuuta 2014 15:43
>> To: Christer Holmberg; Christian Groves; Salvatore Loreto
>> Cc: <mmusic@ietf.org>
>> Subject: RE: [MMUSIC] draft-ietf-mmusic-sctp-sdp-07 SCTP SDP syntax
>> question
>>
>>> I think we need to be careful with the terminology.
>>> As far as I understand, the m- lines describes an SCTP connection -
>>> not an SCTP association - and the sctp-fmt defines the usage of that
>>> SCTP connection.
>> Christer,
>> there isn't any concept of an "SCTP connection" (see RFC 4960)! Rather
>> SCTP association, SCTP path, SCTP stream.
>>
>> If you are refering implicitly to the OSI concept of a (N)-connection
>> (ITU-T X.200), then an OSI (SCTP)-connection would be mapped to the
>> IETF SCTP association in my understanding.
>>
>> Regards,
>> Albrecht
>>
>> PS
>> Perhaps you mean sth like, ".. the m- lines describes an IP transport
>> connection for SCTP, which relates to an SCTP association ..."
>>
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: mmusic [mailto:mmusic-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Christer
>> Holmberg
>> Sent: Mittwoch, 1. Oktober 2014 13:43
>> To: Christian Groves; Salvatore Loreto
>> Cc: <mmusic@ietf.org>
>> Subject: Re: [MMUSIC] draft-ietf-mmusic-sctp-sdp-07 SCTP SDP syntax
>> question
>>
>> Hi,
>>
>> I think we need to be careful with the terminology.
>>
>> As far as I understand, the m- lines describes an SCTP connection -
>> not an SCTP association - and the sctp-fmt defines the usage of that
>> SCTP connection.
>>
>> Depending on the usage, there may then be multiple SCTP associations -
>> for example as in the case of a data-channel connection usage, where
>> the number of SCTP associations will depend on the number of data
>> channels.
>>
>> So, if you want to use BFCP and MSRP, my understanding is that you
>> would need two m- lines (unless, of course, you transport BFCP and
>> MSRP within data channels).
>>
>> Regards,
>>
>> Christer
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: mmusic [mailto:mmusic-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Christian
>> Groves
>> Sent: 1. lokakuuta 2014 10:45
>> To: Salvatore Loreto
>> Cc: <mmusic@ietf.org>
>> Subject: Re: [MMUSIC] draft-ietf-mmusic-sctp-sdp-07 SCTP SDP syntax
>> question
>>
>> Hello Salvatore,
>>
>> Thanks for the replies. Please see some comments below.
>>
>> Regards, Christian
>>
>> On 1/10/2014 5:29 PM, Salvatore Loreto wrote:
>>> Hi Christian,
>>>
>>> thanks a lot for reading and reviewing the draft see more in line
>>>
>>> On Sep 30, 2014, at 3:48 PM, Christian Groves
>>> <Christian.Groves@nteczone.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> I seemed to have got cut and paste happy in 1) below. The "1*(SP
>>>> sctp-fmt)" should only apply to "DTLS/SCTP".
>>>>
>>>> Christian
>>>>
>>>> On 30/09/2014 10:12 PM, Christian Groves wrote:
>>>>> Hello Salvatore,
>>>>>
>>>>> There seems to be several issues with the updated syntax:
>>>>>
>>>>> 1) Cl.4.1 Media Description: With the updated syntax the ability to
>>>>> have more than one usage of the SCTP association has been lost as
>>>>> "sctp-fmt" is a single value.
>>> <Sal>
>>> there have been several discussion about the ability to have more than
>>> one usage of the SCTP association, and has been agreed not to allow it.
>>> So each 'm' line describes a single SCTP association;  each
>>> association has only one single specify usage.
>>> </Sal>
>> [CNG] So how would I specify in SDP a scenario where BFCP uses a
>> DTLS/SCTP association and MSRP uses a DTLS/SCTP association where they
>> both use the same DTLS connection? Are these to be separate m-lines?
>>>
>>> ..snip..
>>>>> 3) Cl.4.1.2: There appears to be a formal space (SP) missing from
>>>>> the syntax between association-usage and max-message-size.
>>>>>
>>>>> sctpmap-attr = "a=fmtp:" association-usage [max-message-size]
>>>>>
>>>>> should be:
>>>>> sctpmap-attr = "a=fmtp:" association-usage [SP max-message-size]
>>>>>
>>>>> The current syntax allows an fmtp usage with no max-message-size
>>>>> parameter, e.g. "a=fmtp:bfcp". Should this be allowed?
>>> <Sal>
>>> this has been discussed back in April or May. It has been decided
>>> that the max-message-size parameter is optional.
>>> In the case it is not present the default value is 64K </Sal>
>> [CNG] I agree that the max-message-size parameter is optional, in that
>> case an endpoint wouldn't specify the whole a=ftmp: line. It seems
>> strange to allow the endpoint to specify half a line?
>>
>>>>> 5) Cl.4.1.2: "If the parameter is not present, the implementation
>>>>> should provide a default, with a suggested value of 64K." Is this
>>>>> 64,000 or is 65,535 bytes?
>> [CNG] I think you skipped this?
>>
>>>>> 7) Cl.10: How will this registry relate to the "WebSocket
>>>>> Subprotocol Name Registry"
>>>>> (http://www.iana.org/assignments/websocket/websocket.xml#subprotocol-name)?
>>>>>
>>> <Sal>
>>> It is not related. The 'association-usage' specifies how the SCTP
>>> association will be used.
>>> For example in the case of webrtc-datachannel value it would indicate
>>> how to pair certain streams, how to consider specific stream etc.
>>> as described in
>>> https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-rtcweb-data-protocol-08 and in
>>> http://tools.ietf.org/wg/rtcweb/draft-ietf-rtcweb-data-channel/
>>>
>>> the WebSocket Subprotocol Name Registry is used to populate the
>>> protocol field in the protocol field in
>>> https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-rtcweb-data-protocol-08#section
>>> -5
>>>
>>> </Sal>
>> [CNG] So if I use the SCTP association for "bfcp" then i'd need to
>> document this in the new registry associated with the draft? and if I
>> then used "bfcp" for webrtc-datachannel then i'd need to update the
>> websocket registry. Two places for the same protocol?
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> mmusic mailing list
>> mmusic@ietf.org
>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mmusic
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> mmusic mailing list
>> mmusic@ietf.org
>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mmusic
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> mmusic mailing list
> mmusic@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mmusic
>