Re: [MMUSIC] What is an m-line?

"Cullen Jennings (fluffy)" <> Tue, 14 May 2013 13:58 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9DB5F21F90CC for <>; Tue, 14 May 2013 06:58:55 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -108.299
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-108.299 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, MANGLED_FORM=2.3, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-8, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id QshPEOkcmMAe for <>; Tue, 14 May 2013 06:58:50 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id AEED921F9051 for <>; Tue, 14 May 2013 06:58:50 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple;;; l=2547; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1368539930; x=1369749530; h=from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:references: in-reply-to:content-id:content-transfer-encoding: mime-version; bh=Qhld5fOLfLme2uWi7tdb5CbMb8mxLKJ5lhxTRaGVwho=; b=hu6PEO8W0WSW4zJrJc4LquWdH15MPU4Z9T78AjU/5vvdT11NDazFUtGN H7Q44D3zZtNDslW0B+2WffDr/l5ZxgCfuaRxQStWLbzJl9VT4yBqzOY4Y VASO9bcrYZj4r/8rtvzdPA4ktD//bKVm+ZaPXQkNNRRodpb/gjiVIqP9x 8=;
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.87,670,1363132800"; d="scan'208";a="210294564"
Received: from ([]) by with ESMTP; 14 May 2013 13:58:50 +0000
Received: from ( []) by (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id r4EDwnSm023117 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=FAIL); Tue, 14 May 2013 13:58:49 GMT
Received: from ([]) by ([]) with mapi id 14.02.0318.004; Tue, 14 May 2013 08:58:48 -0500
From: "Cullen Jennings (fluffy)" <>
To: Martin Thomson <>
Thread-Topic: [MMUSIC] What is an m-line?
Thread-Index: AQHOUKsoppu4JUq1bUKGzbti4BOcIQ==
Date: Tue, 14 May 2013 13:58:48 +0000
Message-ID: <>
References: <>
In-Reply-To: <>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
x-originating-ip: []
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-ID: <>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
Cc: "" <>
Subject: Re: [MMUSIC] What is an m-line?
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: Multiparty Multimedia Session Control Working Group <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 14 May 2013 13:58:55 -0000

People often want to look at this from the point of view of what they wish they can change SDP to mean, but unless we are doing SDPng, we need to look at it from the practical point of view of what has deployed and what SDP was defined as when that equipment deployed. We need to find a way that provided backwards interoperabiliyt while still allowing us to negotiate the things we want now. You can easily define an extension to SDP that means that RTP received on a single m line was meant to be rendered in differnt windows, but the fact of the matter remains that is not how lots of SIP equipment worked so you can't pretend SDP always meant that because it did not.  

On May 13, 2013, at 12:42 PM, Martin Thomson <> wrote:

> We've had a great deal of discussion about plan A and B and the
> various interactions of these proposals with bundling.  But I still
> don't get a good sense that there is a working consensus on what an
> m-line actually represents.
> I think that we've each reached our own conclusions, but they
> definitely are not consistent.  We need a well-understood semantic for
> m-lines if we have any chance of resolving these issues; Plan A/B
> being only the first RTCWEB problem to address.
> RFC 4566 is helpfully devoid of detail, so we are free to come up with
> any interpretation we choose.  Here are the ones that I have seen:
> 1. an m-line represents a single RTP session
>    (or at least the part of the session that touches the client)
>    This appears to be consistent with the Plan B approach
> 2. an m-line represents the set of RTP streams that decode into a
> single rendering, including layers, simulcast and FEC
> 3. an m-line represents a single RTP stream; multiple m-lines might
> be required to obtain a single rendering if it uses layers, simulcast,
> FEC or FID groupings
>    This appears to be consistent with the Plan A approach
> In the first instance, an m-line can be multiple "things".  In the
> latter two cases, an m-line is consistently one "thing" (or part
> thereof).
> The first interpretation has a natural advantage in terms of signaling
> economy and natural bundling.  The latter interpretations seem to have
> advantages in dealing with call transfer and SSRC renumbering.
> So, which is correct?
> _______________________________________________
> mmusic mailing list