Re: [MMUSIC] Review of draft-ietf-mmusic-sctp-sdp-03
Magnus Westerlund <magnus.westerlund@ericsson.com> Thu, 21 March 2013 10:15 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 524FD21F8F1C for <mmusic@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 21 Mar 2013 03:15:20 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -106.105
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-106.105 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.144, BAYES_00=-2.599, HELO_EQ_SE=0.35, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Pdo6Phlzp8uI for <mmusic@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 21 Mar 2013 03:15:19 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mailgw2.ericsson.se (mailgw2.ericsson.se [193.180.251.37]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id EAA7F21F8EDE for <mmusic@ietf.org>; Thu, 21 Mar 2013 03:15:18 -0700 (PDT)
X-AuditID: c1b4fb25-b7f366d000004d10-32-514addb5a0fb
Received: from esessmw0197.eemea.ericsson.se (Unknown_Domain [153.88.253.124]) by mailgw2.ericsson.se (Symantec Mail Security) with SMTP id 6D.36.19728.5BDDA415; Thu, 21 Mar 2013 11:15:17 +0100 (CET)
Received: from [127.0.0.1] (153.88.115.8) by esessmw0197.eemea.ericsson.se (153.88.115.88) with Microsoft SMTP Server id 8.3.279.1; Thu, 21 Mar 2013 11:15:17 +0100
Message-ID: <514ADDB5.8040909@ericsson.com>
Date: Thu, 21 Mar 2013 11:15:17 +0100
From: Magnus Westerlund <magnus.westerlund@ericsson.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; rv:17.0) Gecko/20130307 Thunderbird/17.0.4
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Paul Kyzivat <pkyzivat@alum.mit.edu>
References: <5149D1AA.4010805@ericsson.com> <5149E9E9.10900@alum.mit.edu>
In-Reply-To: <5149E9E9.10900@alum.mit.edu>
X-Enigmail-Version: 1.5.1
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Brightmail-Tracker: H4sIAAAAAAAAA+NgFupjluLIzCtJLcpLzFFi42KZGfG3RnfrXa9Agyn7zSymLn/MYrFiwwFW ByaPv+8/MHksWfKTKYApissmJTUnsyy1SN8ugSvj7N477AU3xSuazrayNzC+Eupi5OSQEDCR 2Ly1nQXCFpO4cG89WxcjF4eQwElGiVmfX0I5yxklbjaBZDg4eAW0Jf53x4M0sAioSszfuoEN xGYTsJC4+aMRzBYVCJb4+eoM2FBeAUGJkzOfsIC0ighoSEzaqgYSZhYQlrhw/jgTiC0sYCtx 7s8mZpASIQFPiUMP7UHCnAJaEhf2n2GHOE1SYsuLdnaIVj2JKVdbGCFseYnmrbOZQWwhoMMa mjpYJzAKzUKyeBaSlllIWhYwMq9iZM9NzMxJLzfaxAgM04NbfqvuYLxzTuQQozQHi5I4b7jr hQAhgfTEktTs1NSC1KL4otKc1OJDjEwcnFINjCu+rTNQSLw6f/6d3CeHuS0Kmc0X1ohIu7/6 cXBVSVTgpOKGC6nC35panhV5Hk7z2/l9Uknby0dHFiW841ngOleNc2Xtdf+KDa7L51meTmq+ a58ttuzwfnNf765lZ9yn+mlZb23axtkz2a456Uuq3O+XXf9zDLsOvdnx4GnEZA+NBatCPzWa iSmxFGckGmoxFxUnAgDIJvqxIQIAAA==
Cc: mmusic@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [MMUSIC] Review of draft-ietf-mmusic-sctp-sdp-03
X-BeenThere: mmusic@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
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: Thu, 21 Mar 2013 10:15:20 -0000
On 2013-03-20 17:55, Paul Kyzivat wrote: > Magnus, > > Some comments on your review, from a CLUE perspective: > > On 3/20/13 11:11 PM, Magnus Westerlund wrote: > >> 6. Section 4.1: >> >> This section discuss the usage of the "data channels" within the SCTP >> association. My personal position is that for the moment this appears to >> be unnecessary. The most important part is the SCTP association >> establishment. Then one can discuss the general application using the >> SCTP association as whole. Examples of such are WebRTC data channel. >> >> If anyone want stream level information in SDP then I propose that this >> is handled as a extension to this signaling, not an from the start >> included functionality as we don't appear to have clear requirement for >> that. > > Who is "we"? MMUSIC WG > > In CLUE we expect to use this mechanism for a CLUE data channel. > And we intend to do so in pure sip-sip cases as well as webrtc-sip and > webrtc-webrtc cases. Yes. > > While webrtc-webrtc may have an independent mechanism to work out the > channel usage, that is certainly not so for sip-sip sessions. > > So I think "we" (CLUE) have a requirement to negotiate channel usage in > SDP. Do you? Or it is sufficient to say m=application 12234 UDP/DTLS/SCTP CLUE Indicating that this SCTP association is using CLUEs defined way, not WebRTC. I want to separate the usage of individual SCTP streams and the general usage of the SCTP association. > >> 7. Section 4.2: >> >> What are the requirements behind being able to establish multiple SCTP >> association over the same DTLS connection? I am very unclear why this >> would be required, and if not really needed I would suggest keeping >> things simple. > > I agree there has been no compelling need advanced for multiple SCTP > associations over the same DTLS connection. But the fact is that SCTP > has its own notion of port, and that needs to be dealt with one way or > another. At a minimum this document should specify what SCTP port is to > be used when conforming to this specification. Agreed, there need to be clarity on the port usage. > >> 8. Section 4.3: I guess this can for the moment be removed as it appears >> to be taken care in other places, such as the RTCWEB WG data channel >> protocol proposal. > > See above. That doesn't meet CLUE needs. Disagree, I don't think CLUE need SCTP stream specific indication or negoitation. It will be sufficient to indicate that this is CLUE using SCTP. Cheers Magnus Westerlund ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Multimedia Technologies, Ericsson Research EAB/TVM ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Ericsson AB | Phone +46 10 7148287 Färögatan 6 | Mobile +46 73 0949079 SE-164 80 Stockholm, Sweden| mailto: magnus.westerlund@ericsson.com ----------------------------------------------------------------------
- [MMUSIC] Review of draft-ietf-mmusic-sctp-sdp-03 Magnus Westerlund
- Re: [MMUSIC] Review of draft-ietf-mmusic-sctp-sdp… Paul Kyzivat
- Re: [MMUSIC] Review of draft-ietf-mmusic-sctp-sdp… Magnus Westerlund
- [MMUSIC] Proto identifier: To UDP or not to UDP (… Harald Alvestrand
- Re: [MMUSIC] Review of draft-ietf-mmusic-sctp-sdp… Paul Kyzivat
- Re: [MMUSIC] Review of draft-ietf-mmusic-sctp-sdp… Magnus Westerlund
- Re: [MMUSIC] Proto identifier: To UDP or not to U… Magnus Westerlund
- Re: [MMUSIC] Review of draft-ietf-mmusic-sctp-sdp… Mary Barnes
- Re: [MMUSIC] Review of draft-ietf-mmusic-sctp-sdp… Paul Kyzivat