Re: [MMUSIC] Review of draft-nandakumar-mmusic-sdp-mux-attributes-02: sections 5.22, 5.40, 5.41, 5.42

"Ejzak, Richard P (Richard)" <richard.ejzak@alcatel-lucent.com> Wed, 05 June 2013 13:42 UTC

Return-Path: <richard.ejzak@alcatel-lucent.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 6EF0921F9AFB for <mmusic@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 5 Jun 2013 06:42:21 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -10.448
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-10.448 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.151, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-8]
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 LMktGdQa3pR7 for <mmusic@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 5 Jun 2013 06:42:16 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ihemail1.lucent.com (ihemail1.lucent.com [135.245.0.33]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9BF7A21F9B09 for <mmusic@ietf.org>; Wed, 5 Jun 2013 06:42:14 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from us70uusmtp4.zam.alcatel-lucent.com (h135-5-2-66.lucent.com [135.5.2.66]) by ihemail1.lucent.com (8.13.8/IER-o) with ESMTP id r55DgCtZ026280 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=FAIL); Wed, 5 Jun 2013 08:42:12 -0500 (CDT)
Received: from US70UWXCHHUB02.zam.alcatel-lucent.com (us70uwxchhub02.zam.alcatel-lucent.com [135.5.2.49]) by us70uusmtp4.zam.alcatel-lucent.com (GMO) with ESMTP id r55Dg8LG020400 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=FAIL); Wed, 5 Jun 2013 09:42:12 -0400
Received: from US70UWXCHMBA04.zam.alcatel-lucent.com ([169.254.12.148]) by US70UWXCHHUB02.zam.alcatel-lucent.com ([135.5.2.49]) with mapi id 14.02.0247.003; Wed, 5 Jun 2013 09:42:08 -0400
From: "Ejzak, Richard P (Richard)" <richard.ejzak@alcatel-lucent.com>
To: Cullen Jennings <fluffy@iii.ca>
Thread-Topic: [MMUSIC] Review of draft-nandakumar-mmusic-sdp-mux-attributes-02: sections 5.22, 5.40, 5.41, 5.42
Thread-Index: Ac5dzHO0Q+r/un2nR0ihy0dNOS7t9gCuMDzQAEgo0AAAEXdZEA==
Date: Wed, 5 Jun 2013 13:42:08 +0000
Message-ID: <03FBA798AC24E3498B74F47FD082A92F3D7D668A@US70UWXCHMBA04.zam.alcatel-lucent.com>
References: <7594FB04B1934943A5C02806D1A2204B1C37E6A7@ESESSMB209.ericsson.se> <03FBA798AC24E3498B74F47FD082A92F3D7CDAF9@US70UWXCHMBA05.zam.alcatel-lucent.com> <16B6138A-21A7-46B5-BDA4-FE61380DB7CF@iii.ca>
In-Reply-To: <16B6138A-21A7-46B5-BDA4-FE61380DB7CF@iii.ca>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-originating-ip: [135.5.27.16]
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.57 on 135.245.2.33
Cc: "mmusic@ietf.org WG" <mmusic@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [MMUSIC] Review of draft-nandakumar-mmusic-sdp-mux-attributes-02: sections 5.22, 5.40, 5.41, 5.42
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: Wed, 05 Jun 2013 13:42:21 -0000

Hi Cullen,
Having looked into it further, I would suggest that the "visited-realm" and "alternate-realm" attributes be assigned the TRANSPORT category.  They represent information similar to the candidate attribute and can be different across m lines as a result of various 3pcc scenarios.  IDENTICAL would not be appropriate.  The remaining attributes in 5.42 should be assigned the NORMAL category.

Thanks,
Richard

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Cullen Jennings [mailto:fluffy@iii.ca]
> Sent: Tuesday, June 04, 2013 7:34 PM
> To: Ejzak, Richard P (Richard)
> Cc: mmusic@ietf.org WG; suhasietf@gmail.com
> Subject: Re: [MMUSIC] Review of draft-nandakumar-mmusic-sdp-mux-
> attributes-02: sections 5.22, 5.40, 5.41, 5.42
> 
> 
> Richard,
> 
> Could things like "visited realm" just need to be the same if using
> Bundle? What I mean is that if two m-lines had different "visited
> realm" values, then they could not be bundled? It seems unlikely to me
> they would have a different "visited realm" but I don't really
> understand all of this.
> 
> Any advice you could give on what the values should be would be great.
> If more work is needed TBD may be the correct values but SECIAL would
> imply that there was text in some draft that said what to do and it was
> not one of the default actions.
> 
> Thanks, Cullen
> 
> 
> 
> 
> On Jun 3, 2013, at 1:22 PM, "Ejzak, Richard P (Richard)"
> <richard.ejzak@alcatel-lucent.com> wrote:
> 
> > Hi Christer,
> > Thanks for asking me to comment on 5.42.  First of all, I agree with
> all your other comments.  I would recommend that the category for all
> the items in 5.42 be listed as "SPECIAL" since more work would need to
> be done in 3GPP to specify their potential use with BUNDLE.  These
> attributes are all transport related but not in a way that can be
> easily captured by the category "TRANSPORT".
> >
> > There are two typos in the table: "visited realm" should be "visited-
> realm" and the second occurrence of "omr-m-att" should be "omr-m-bw".
> >
> > Richard
> >
> > From: Christer Holmberg [mailto:christer.holmberg@ericsson.com]
> > Sent: Friday, May 31, 2013 2:33 AM
> > To: mmusic@ietf.org; suhasietf@gmail.com; Ari Keränen; Flemming
> Andreasen (fandreas@cisco.com)
> > Cc: Ejzak, Richard P (Richard)
> > Subject: Review of draft-nandakumar-mmusic-sdp-mux-attributes-02:
> sections 5.22, 5.40, 5.41, 5.42
> >
> > Hi,
> >
> > I was requested to review the attributes listed in sections 5.22,
> 5.40, 5.41 and 5.42.
> >
> > However, first I have a general comment on the document:
> >
> > For some attributes (e.g. MSRP-CEMA), there is note text saying:
> >
> > "Not recommended due to legacy interop purposes"
> >
> > Making such statements is completely outside the scope of the
> document. The document is about multiplexing, and how/if attributes are
> affected.
> >
> > There is also similar note text saying:
> >
> > "Not recommended due to interop purposes"
> >
> > Now, for the 3GPP defined attributes you could say "Usage only
> defined for IMS", or something. But, again, it's not within the scope
> of this document to recommend against using things.
> >
> > .unless, of course, there from a multiplexing perspective is a reason
> to do so, and they should be listed under the NOT RECOMMENDED category:
> >
> >
> > 5.22
> >
> >   +------------+---------------------------------+---------+---------
> -+
> >    | Name       | Notes                           | Current |
> Category |
> >    +------------+---------------------------------+---------+--------
> --+
> >    | msrp-cema  |                                 | M       | NORMAL
> |
> >    |            |                                 |         |
> |
> >    |            |                                 |         |
> |
> >    +------------+---------------------------------+---------+--------
> --+
> >
> >
> > 5.40
> >
> >    +-------------+--------------------------------+---------+--------
> --+
> >    | Name        | Notes                          | Current |
> Category |
> >    +-------------+--------------------------------+---------+--------
> --+
> >    | g.3gpp.cat  | Usage defined for the IP       | M       | NORMAL
> |
> >    |             | Multimedia Subsystem [ref]     |         |
> |
> >    |             |                                |         |
> |
> >    +-------------+--------------------------------+---------+--------
> --+
> >
> >
> > 5.41
> >
> >    +-------------+--------------------------------+---------+--------
> --+
> >    | Name        | Notes                          | Current |
> Category |
> >    +-------------+--------------------------------+---------+--------
> --+
> >    | g.3gpp.crs  | Usage defined for the IP       | M       | NORMAL
> |
> >    |             | Multimedia Subsystem [ref]     |         |
> |
> >    |             |                                |         |
> |
> >    +-------------+--------------------------------+---------+--------
> --+
> >
> >
> > 5.42
> >
> > This is actually an interesting one, and needs a little more
> investigation. So, I'll have to come back on that one. It would be good
> if Richard Ejzak, who is the "architect" behind the attributes, could
> take a look :)
> >
> >   +------------------+---------------------------+---------+---------
> -+
> >    | Name             | Notes                     | Current |
> Category |
> >    +------------------+---------------------------+---------+--------
> --+
> >    | secondary-realm  | Usage defined for the IP  | M       | TBD
> |
> >    |                  | Multimedia Subsystem [ref]|         |
> |
> >    |                  |                           |         |
> |
> >    | visited realm    | Usage defined for the IP  | M       | TBD
> |
> >    |                  | Multimedia Subsystem [ref]|         |
> |
> >    |                  |                           |         |
> |
> >    | omr-m-cksum      | Usage defined for the IP  | M       | TBD
> |
> >    |                  | Multimedia Subsystem [ref]|         |
> |
> >    |                  |                           |         |
> |
> >    | omr-s-cksum      | Usage defined for the IP  | M       | TBD
> |
> >    |                  | Multimedia Subsystem [ref]|         |
> |
> >    |                  |                           |         |
> |
> >    | omr-m-att        | Usage defined for the IP  | M       | TBD
> |
> >    |                  | Multimedia Subsystem [ref]|         |
> |
> >    |                  |                           |         |
> |
> >    | omr-s-att        | Usage defined for the IP  | M       | TBD
> |
> >    |                  | Multimedia Subsystem [ref]|         |
> |
> >    |                  |                           |         |
> |
> >    | omr-s-bw         | Usage defined for the IP  | M       | TBD
> |
> >    |                  | Multimedia Subsystem [ref]|         |
> |
> >    |                  |                           |         |
> |
> >    | omr-m-att        | Usage defined for the IP  | M       | TBD
> |
> >    |                  | Multimedia Subsystem [ref]|         |
> |
> >    |                  |                           |         |
> |
> >    | omr-codecs       | Usage defined for the IP  | M       | TBD
> |
> >    |                  | Multimedia Subsystem [ref]|         |
> |
> >    |                  |                           |         |
> |
> >    +------------------+---------------------------+---------+--------
> --+
> >
> >
> >
> > Regards,
> >
> > Christer
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > mmusic mailing list
> > mmusic@ietf.org
> > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mmusic