Re: [MMUSIC] Eric Rescorla's No Objection on draft-ietf-mmusic-sdp-bundle-negotiation-51: (with COMMENT)

[Eric Rescorla <[e-mail]>]

On Mon, May 21, 2018 at 11:47 PM, Christer Holmberg <
[e-mail]> wrote:

> Hi,
>
> ...
>
> >>>>>   [Section 7.3.1] as the answerer tagged "m=" section.  In the answer
> >>>>>   the answerer BUNDLE-tag indicates the answerer tagged "m=" section.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> I'm having trouble reading this paragraph. How do you select an m=
> section that correspond to the selected m= section.
> >>>>
> >>>> The n:th m- line in an answer corresponds to the n:th m- line in the
> offer.
> >>>>
> >>>> There was some discussion about the terminology, and “corresponds”
> was the outcome.
> >>>>
> >>>> I did find a small nit in the text, though:
> >>>>
> >>>> s/”section in that”/”section that”
> >>>
> >>> My point is that this paragraph just is too hard to read. My problem
> isn't corresponds, it's
> >>> "select" and "selected" together. Can you rewrite it so that it's
> clearer. Maybe just indicating
> >>> that one is is the offer and one is in the answer?
> >>
> >> What about:
> >>
> >>   The answerer MUST select the "m=" section *in the answer* that
> corresponds to the
> >>   selected offerer tagged "m=" section in the corresponding offer
> >>   [Section 7.3.1] as the answerer tagged "m=" section.  In the answer
> >>   the answerer BUNDLE-tag indicates the answerer tagged "m=" section.
> >
> > This seems clearer, but I'm not sure what "selected" is doing in
> "selected offerer tagged". Can you explain?
>
> The answerer first selects the offer tagged "m=" section, as described in
> section 7.3.1. After that, it selects the corresponding "m=" section in the
> answer as the answerer tagged "m=" section.
>

Well, the use of "selected" here in both cases is super-confusing.

I think what would be easiest would simply be to merge these two sections.
I.e., the answerer determines (it actually doesn't "select") the tagged m=
section and then places it in its own answer.

-Ekr