From: "Ali C. Begen (abegen)" <abegen@cisco.com>
To: Christer Holmberg <christer.holmberg@ericsson.com>
Thread-Topic: The rtp-duplication related drafts - Initial comments on
 draft-ietf-mmusic-delayed-duplication
Thread-Index: Ac3tn4sLCJXHhYY7RfKGLsAQmCTlmAAUodaA
Date: Tue, 8 Jan 2013 16:46:57 +0000
Message-ID: <C15918F2FCDA0243A7C919DA7C4BE9940CE6D080@xmb-rcd-x01.cisco.com>
References: <7594FB04B1934943A5C02806D1A2204B094294@ESESSMB209.ericsson.se>
In-Reply-To: <7594FB04B1934943A5C02806D1A2204B094294@ESESSMB209.ericsson.se>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-ID: <F6993AE6B18293459DBB25D3618EF6A8@cisco.com>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
Cc: "mmusic@ietf.org" <mmusic@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [MMUSIC] The rtp-duplication related drafts - Initial comments on
 draft-ietf-mmusic-delayed-duplication
Precedence: list

Hi Christer,

On Jan 8, 2013, at 7:56 AM, Christer Holmberg <christer.holmberg@ericsson.c=
om> wrote:

> Hi Ali,
>=20
> Some initial comments on draft-ietf-mmusic-delayed-duplication:
>=20
> Q1:	I assume the attribute indicates the SENDING delay, or? I think it ne=
eds to be more explicit.
>=20
Yes, the dup delay refers to the delay applied during sending. The delay be=
tween the dup packets might be different on the receiving side. Is this wha=
t you asked?

> Q2:	There are no SDP Offer/Answer considerations. Does the Offer have imp=
act on the Answer? What is the expected behavior if the Answerer does not s=
upport the mechanism? Etc.
>=20

This attribute is used with the grouping defined in the other draft. And O/=
A stuff applies to that grouping semantics, which the draft explains. Maybe=
, I should put a note regarding this in this draft?

Cheers,
-acbegen

> Regards,
>=20
> Christer
>=20
>=20
> -----Original Message-----
> From: mmusic-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:mmusic-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf =
Of Ali C. Begen (abegen)
> Sent: 4. tammikuuta 2013 0:31
> To: mmusic@ietf.org
> Subject: [MMUSIC] The rtp-duplication related drafts
>=20
> Hi everyone,
>=20
> The following two drafts have been adopted by MMUSIC a while ago and the =
main draft discussing the RTP duplication issues is being finalized in AVTE=
XT (this was also adopted as a WG item a while ago). It is simply waiting f=
or the WG to make a decision on the srcname proposal.
>=20
> http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-mmusic-delayed-duplication/
> http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-mmusic-duplication-grouping/
>=20
> These two mmusic drafts are essentially completed and they are needed to =
be done for the avtext draft. I hope they will be WGLC'ed some time soon. I=
n the mean time, I would like to get any comments, feedback that you might =
have.
>=20
> Thanks.
> -acbegen
>=20
> PS Here is the AVTEXT draft.
> http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-avtext-rtp-duplication/=20
> _______________________________________________
> mmusic mailing list
> mmusic@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mmusic