IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: Quick comment re. draft-ietf-mmusic-sap-v2-01.txt

Henning Schulzrinne <schulzrinne@cs.columbia.edu> Mon, 07 June 1999 14:05 UTC

Return-Path: <owner-confctrl>
Received: (from majordom@localhost) by zephyr.isi.edu (8.8.7/8.8.6) id HAA05455 for confctrl-outgoing; Mon, 7 Jun 1999 07:05:41 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from tnt.isi.edu (tnt.isi.edu [128.9.128.128]) by zephyr.isi.edu (8.8.7/8.8.6) with ESMTP id HAA05450 for <confctrl@zephyr.isi.edu>; Mon, 7 Jun 1999 07:05:40 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from cs.columbia.edu (cs.columbia.edu [128.59.16.20]) by tnt.isi.edu (8.8.7/8.8.6) with ESMTP id HAA19122 for <confctrl@ISI.EDU>; Mon, 7 Jun 1999 07:05:38 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from opus.cs.columbia.edu (opus.cs.columbia.edu [128.59.20.100]) by cs.columbia.edu (8.9.1/8.9.1) with ESMTP id KAA01691; Mon, 7 Jun 1999 10:05:37 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from cs.columbia.edu (erlang.cs.columbia.edu [128.59.19.141]) by opus.cs.columbia.edu (8.9.1/8.9.1) with ESMTP id KAA15372; Mon, 7 Jun 1999 10:05:34 -0400 (EDT)
Message-ID: <375BD1AD.E399D4F@cs.columbia.edu>
Date: Mon, 07 Jun 1999 10:05:34 -0400
From: Henning Schulzrinne <schulzrinne@cs.columbia.edu>
Organization: Columbia University, Dept. of Computer Science
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.5 [en] (X11; I; SunOS 5.6 sun4u)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Colin Perkins <C.Perkins@cs.ucl.ac.uk>
CC: Ross Finlayson <finlayson@live.com>, confctrl@ISI.EDU
Subject: Re: Quick comment re. draft-ietf-mmusic-sap-v2-01.txt
References: <1102.928754717@cs.ucl.ac.uk>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: owner-confctrl@zephyr.isi.edu
Precedence: bulk

Colin Perkins wrote:
> 
> --> Ross Finlayson writes:
> >Colin (cc. confctrl),
> >
> >I've just taken a quick look at "draft-ietf-mmusic-sap-v2-01.txt".  Good job!
> >
> >I'd like to suggest, though, that you simplify the draft by completely
> >removing section 6: the section that describes Directory Sessions.  Because
> >directory session advertisements are a feature of *SDP*, the discussion
> >here doesn't really belong in a description of SAP - the announcement
> >protocol.
> 
> Perhaps, although the authentication requirements tie it to SAP somewhat?
> I was trying to avoid writing a one-page RFC on this, but if you think it's
> better split out into a separate document I have no real objection to this.

Given that SDP is now widely used outside of SAP, it would be much
better, I believe, to keep SDP and SAP as separate as possible. This
avoids having to go hunting all over for SDP-related information that
might be useful outside the context of SAP. Thus, I'd move any
description of SDP to a separate appendix, similar to the 'SDP
considerations' section in SIP. (SIP, for example, may well carry SDP
payloads that contain directory sessions, as could email.)


> 
> Cheers,
> Colin

-- 
Henning Schulzrinne   http://www.cs.columbia.edu/~hgs

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email