Re: [MMUSIC] Sending a=rtcp-mux-only w/o a=rtcp-mux

Eric Rescorla <ekr@rtfm.com> Fri, 03 February 2017 17:41 UTC

Return-Path: <ekr@rtfm.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 04D761294B7 for <mmusic@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 3 Feb 2017 09:41:50 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.598
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.598 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=rtfm-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id iEPuCt2_3La5 for <mmusic@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 3 Feb 2017 09:41:48 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-yw0-x231.google.com (mail-yw0-x231.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4002:c05::231]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 587871294B1 for <mmusic@ietf.org>; Fri, 3 Feb 2017 09:41:48 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-yw0-x231.google.com with SMTP id u68so16244611ywg.0 for <mmusic@ietf.org>; Fri, 03 Feb 2017 09:41:48 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=rtfm-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to; bh=IUdRHvf3C7T7X2llX+rWwOZ6gprU7aWczEIHE1yEPhU=; b=rwun5g73VFbRsGkbUeO0oETU+MNBN/Gxr7PR7GYGApzmFeHOW2Or7SPN97GRlpDEYQ Dy0dbaTaVH9P+D5bU1pwn3jNfqloiPVTcYT83Wh37o1MagNPT0yKvsihdwc+t812cCca W04zIcIp0GvKF/3PhdXk9q3VHhGvYvRWlrkj9/5GMMijrE84P7ijKvUlR5FJ1t3GMMTp O6465vmmhKvxpbbMLKxNYM5HK2MsmGgCmjZDRhf2MIK5JURbDrvvCTGRcrS3A9eIMncc Fw6w8TP6ig11eB/62pBL4JF1KH2cCsyzmC/IolbtpjqFmwatNQjQ/6Jz0YJeilX3uB7q Cfng==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:subject:to; bh=IUdRHvf3C7T7X2llX+rWwOZ6gprU7aWczEIHE1yEPhU=; b=Cc1yNdWE7gwe5zY+lgnxNCJUPP94RKXK8+zIeQzwAamyWjvy9aRo5Gr9tJWKQkXn76 ZOIU01+/8fsa74gHKR9NoIDsxXgJwnywZ2gNrAUnEKKmuhvpsbo9EpVrweH8n86HjPp/ Yl3wOlVoIj7B4ME3xSPYNPMGxk4dQshLpK16+qEMUc+8Fi+5FgtMQfOk4rhHRMPWcxSM K8jUwPbi7ZdF0jTmkarCPgLl9/hbA8tPpGarppE7LN7qFZ9OyLMS14EUYhb7Vxln4z34 hThpgqRPs399rmTQnoTeQY8k8TiSkj+3ZcxL8kDStIkR0lSmD0fOjpndcvAjTk0JuudB MYNg==
X-Gm-Message-State: AIkVDXJWfnNOwanUzERA1eaXdDPE5iPBPbuxsDafxGXtW3AaRGPDJ6CQUZT4nujDWwcpFZEQyE+icLVS6kOMoQ==
X-Received: by 10.129.92.2 with SMTP id q2mr11412093ywb.87.1486143707568; Fri, 03 Feb 2017 09:41:47 -0800 (PST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.13.204.80 with HTTP; Fri, 3 Feb 2017 09:41:06 -0800 (PST)
In-Reply-To: <CABcZeBPESaiH2wuE8RhcBHKz5h10MjKQ_EBDzcRpoy7mYeaspA@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CABcZeBPESaiH2wuE8RhcBHKz5h10MjKQ_EBDzcRpoy7mYeaspA@mail.gmail.com>
From: Eric Rescorla <ekr@rtfm.com>
Date: Fri, 03 Feb 2017 09:41:06 -0800
Message-ID: <CABcZeBOY5pNRB=W_Zkqm5gYDMRGb-p7ChYctGRmfw5oGyYk-Pg@mail.gmail.com>
To: mmusic WG <mmusic@ietf.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="001a114d6f16c68bb90547a3cb2d"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/mmusic/K6BPlkIvE_qW-fsEa32TN6IA-2Y>
Subject: Re: [MMUSIC] Sending a=rtcp-mux-only w/o a=rtcp-mux
X-BeenThere: mmusic@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17
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: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/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: Fri, 03 Feb 2017 17:41:50 -0000

Following up to myself, I don't think it's sensible for answers to contain
a=rtcp-mux-only, because either you accepted mux, in which case all is
good, or you rejected it, in which case it was rejected.

-Ekr


On Fri, Feb 3, 2017 at 9:38 AM, Eric Rescorla <ekr@rtfm.com> wrote:

> I have been reading the mux-exclusive document and I'm not sure it says
> quite what we want. Specifically, S 4.2 says:
>
>    When an offerer sends the initial offer, if the offerer wants to
>    indicate exclusive RTP/RTCP multiplexing for RTP-based media, the
>    offerer MUST associate an SDP 'rtcp-mux-only' attribute with the
>    associated SDP media description ("m=" line).
>
>    In addition, if the offerer associates an SDP 'rtcp-mux-only'
>    attribute with an SDP media description ("m=" line), the offerer MAY
>    also associate an SDP 'rtcp-mux' attribute with the same SDP media
>    description ("m=" line), following the procedures in [RFC5761].
>
> As I understand this text, the offerer may say the following things:
>
>  1. No a=rtcp-mux: No muxing.
>  2. a=rtcp-mux: I am offering RTCP mux
>  3. a=rtcp-mux-only + a=rtcp-mux: I will only do RTCP mux
>  4. a=rtcp-mux-only: I will only do RTCP mux (same as #3).
>
> I don't think the last of these is sensible. No current implementation
> will know what to do with a=rtcp-mux-only w/o a=rtcp-mux, so this will
> result in interop failures. Thus the MAY in the second graf needs to be
> a MUST.
>
> -Ekr
>
>