IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [MMUSIC] 10 BUNDLE questions

Harald Alvestrand <harald@alvestrand.no> Mon, 18 March 2013 07:08 UTC

Return-Path: <harald@alvestrand.no>
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 B47D321F86A8 for <mmusic@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 18 Mar 2013 00:08:12 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -110.598
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-110.598 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.000, BAYES_00=-2.599, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-8, 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 z9CL6PHd9G77 for <mmusic@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 18 Mar 2013 00:08:12 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from eikenes.alvestrand.no (eikenes.alvestrand.no [158.38.152.233]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C460621F854F for <mmusic@ietf.org>; Mon, 18 Mar 2013 00:08:11 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by eikenes.alvestrand.no (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1639439E0E1; Mon, 18 Mar 2013 08:08:08 +0100 (CET)
X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at eikenes.alvestrand.no
Received: from eikenes.alvestrand.no ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (eikenes.alvestrand.no [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id vbIdDoIRm2DB; Mon, 18 Mar 2013 08:08:07 +0100 (CET)
Received: from [IPv6:2001:470:de0a:27:8cd4:f75f:204f:7ae0] (unknown [IPv6:2001:470:de0a:27:8cd4:f75f:204f:7ae0]) by eikenes.alvestrand.no (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 2D1A439E01E; Mon, 18 Mar 2013 08:08:07 +0100 (CET)
Message-ID: <5146BD66.9090506@alvestrand.no>
Date: Mon, 18 Mar 2013 08:08:22 +0100
From: Harald Alvestrand <harald@alvestrand.no>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:17.0) Gecko/20130308 Thunderbird/17.0.4
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Justin Uberti <juberti@google.com>
References: <CAOJ7v-0tr6_HAPwOnLD_De-LkNCsj1EfLhZL=G_B=k5tz9Hkwg@mail.gmail.com> <5145786F.8060507@alvestrand.no> <CAOJ7v-0X2KbAgQpf0wN7wq0=eumAA300tn2TVWHPwmMrcJq8uw@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAOJ7v-0X2KbAgQpf0wN7wq0=eumAA300tn2TVWHPwmMrcJq8uw@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="------------090800090006060106090107"
Cc: "mmusic@ietf.org" <mmusic@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [MMUSIC] 10 BUNDLE questions
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: Mon, 18 Mar 2013 07:08:12 -0000

On 03/18/2013 04:19 AM, Justin Uberti wrote:
>
>
>>      1. If the BUNDLE mids in the answer doesn't match the BUNDLE
>>         mids in the offer, what happens? (assume fail)
>>
>     I think this violates RFC 5888 section 9.1, so it should be a FAIL.
>
>
> According to 9.2, the only restriction is the answer mids must be a 
> subset of the offer, so we would have to specify an exact match 
> directly. But I think we do want to impose this restriction, or else 
> we can't BUNDLE a new m-line until we know the other side wants to 
> BUNDLE it as well.

The important phrase from 9.1 is

    If a media stream that contained a particular "mid" identifier in the
    offer contains a different identifier in the answer, the application
    ignores all of the "mid" and "group" lines that might appear in the
    session description.  The following example illustrates this
    scenario.

So if there's any mismatch, we don't get BUNDLE negotiated. Negotiation 
might not fail, but we don't get BUNDLE (or any other form of grouping).

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email