Re: [MMUSIC] Partial Offer/Partial Answer draft - MIME type value

[Christer Holmberg <[e-mail]>]

>>> Maybe you are right. Then sip will go the way of h323 while the world 
>>> moves on to webrtc.
>>
>> It is amazing to hear from you that h323 way of media negotiation is 
>> better than SIP now :-)
>
> Even though you included a smiley, I think maybe you didn't understand how I meant that statement. I didn't intend to suggest that sip should adopt any new behavior from h323.

Throughout the years I think we have tried (and are still trying) very hard to adopt H.245 features into SDP O/A...

Regards,

Christer








> Let us assume content-disposition "partial-session" for partial 
> offer/answer exist. So, RFC 3264 does not applies for 
> "partial-session". How the normal interaction and race condition 
> between "session" and "partial-session" will be handled as both impact 
> the same session in the media layer? Could you please explain.
>
> Thanks
> Partha
>
>
>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: [e-mail] [mailto:[e-mail]] On 
>> Behalf Of Paul Kyzivat
>> Sent: Saturday, October 19, 2013 2:24 AM
>> To: Christer Holmberg
>> Cc: [e-mail]
>> Subject: Re: [MMUSIC] Partial Offer/Partial Answer draft - MIME type 
>> value
>>
>> On 10/18/13 4:44 PM, Christer Holmberg wrote:
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>>>> Content-Disposition does not apply to intermediaries. So, a proxy
>> that
>>>>> only understands application/sdp (e.g. for gate control purpose)
>> will
>>>>> not even look at the C-D header field value for other bodies. And, 
>>>>> unless such proxy understands POF/PAN, there may not be any media 
>>>>> passing through...
>>>>
>>>> Right. A middlebox that doesn't understand application/sdpfrag 
>>>> won't
>> know to look at its contents and let the new streams through. And a 
>> middlebox that sees
>>>> something marked as "application/sdp" that conveys only a tiny
>> fraction of the session will probably be just as catastrophic; I 
>> would imagine everything but the
>>>> modified streams would be shut off. There's no way to win here.
>>>
>>> I think it would reject the Offer - at least that's what it should 
>>> do
>> according to 3264.
>>
>> 3264 only talks about how to process offers and answers described in 
>> SDP. It does not say how those are conveyed in sip. 3261 says that 
>> they are carried in body parts of content-type application/sdp with 
>> content-disposition of 'session'. If a body part has content-type 
>> application/sdp but has a disposition other than 'session' then it 
>> isn't an offer or answer according to 3261, and so 3264 doesn't 
>> apply.
>>
>>>> At some point, we have to come to peace with the fact that any
>> middleboxes that aren't primarily in the business of stifling 
>> progress will need to keep pace with protocol extensions as they get deployed.
>>>
>>> I really wish things worked that way :)
>>
>> So progress ends because middleboxes don't permit it?
>>
>> Maybe you are right. Then sip will go the way of h323 while the world 
>> moves on to webrtc.
>>
>> 	Thanks,
>> 	Paul
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> mmusic mailing list
>> [e-mail]
>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mmusic
>
>