Re: [MMUSIC] Possible BUNDLE alternative syntax: explicit m-line for bundled session

[Christer Holmberg <[e-mail]>]

Hi,

>>>What I understood is that the group (Cullen in particular) does not want
>>> the same port on multiple media lines when it is not known whether the peer supports bundle.  Once you
>>> get agreement to use bundle I don't see a problem, but maybe I missed something...  Does anyone have a
>>> different perspective?
>>
>> Then one could claim that the initial offer should be sent without bundle
>> (no matter how the mechanism works), and then enable bundle once you know
>> that the other endpoint supports it.
>
> What is the advantage of doing this?  The format suggested by Cullen will be handled correctly by an endpoint that doesn't support 
> bundle and could also be handled correctly by an endpoint supporting bundle (if it is understood that the connection information comes
> from the first media line in the bundle).  I suggested a second offer/answer only for the benefit of intermediates.

And how is the m=bundle mechanism not going to be handled correctly by endpoints? An endpoint that doesn't support it would reject it, and an endpoint that supports it can accept it.

Regards,

Christer