Re: [MMUSIC] Scope of RTP payload types in BUNDLE?

"Stach, Thomas" <thomas.stach@siemens-enterprise.com> Mon, 10 June 2013 12:48 UTC

Return-Path: <thomas.stach@siemens-enterprise.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 AD73C21F86C0 for <mmusic@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 10 Jun 2013 05:48:52 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.599
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id KS+oc7-aViJL for <mmusic@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 10 Jun 2013 05:48:47 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from senmx11-mx.siemens-enterprise.com (senmx11-mx.siemens-enterprise.com [62.134.46.9]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4261B21F90E4 for <mmusic@ietf.org>; Mon, 10 Jun 2013 05:47:08 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from MCHP01HTC.global-ad.net (unknown [172.29.42.234]) by senmx11-mx.siemens-enterprise.com (Server) with ESMTP id 9A28B1EB8532; Mon, 10 Jun 2013 14:20:50 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from MCHP04MSX.global-ad.net ([169.254.1.174]) by MCHP01HTC.global-ad.net ([172.29.42.234]) with mapi id 14.03.0123.003; Mon, 10 Jun 2013 14:20:50 +0200
From: "Stach, Thomas" <thomas.stach@siemens-enterprise.com>
To: Paul Kyzivat <pkyzivat@alum.mit.edu>, Cullen Jennings <fluffy@iii.ca>
Thread-Topic: [MMUSIC] Scope of RTP payload types in BUNDLE?
Thread-Index: AQHOY531b18zsuOxAkCqqvPaFYXQyJkrE8KAgAJrGICAAWOjYA==
Date: Mon, 10 Jun 2013 12:20:49 +0000
Message-ID: <F81CEE99482EFE438DAE2A652361EE121144B928@MCHP04MSX.global-ad.net>
References: <749DCA95-2D40-46B3-9A3D-E63356C7A2C1@csperkins.org> <1892A917-C408-4E8F-AB19-206ED508762C@csperkins.org> <7594FB04B1934943A5C02806D1A2204B1C3799BC@ESESSMB209.ericsson.se> <4EDA75BD-D753-4153-929B-10427274224D@csperkins.org> <7594FB04B1934943A5C02806D1A2204B1C3799EE@ESESSMB209.ericsson.se>, <599C780A-F483-470E-91F2-68DBA605C79C@csperkins.org> <7594FB04B1934943A5C02806D1A2204B1C379D6E@ESESSMB209.ericsson.se>, <64C06EE8-A16D-4C3E-8A11-D6400F620A8E@csperkins.org> <7594FB04B1934943A5C02806D1A2204B1C379DC8@ESESSMB209.ericsson.se> <71ED9E54-DF0C-4DB9-A7F4-09A0BC90B177@csperkins.org> <51A3B070.1090006@alum.mit.edu> <FF8A3ABB-992C-48D9-856F-A6A21A35A0C1@iii.ca> <51AF5EEE.8080904@alum.mit.edu> <7594FB04B1934943A5C02806D1A2204B1C3836E7@ESESSMB209.ericsson.se> <51AF6BB9.3010807@alum.mit.edu> <7594FB04B1934943A5C02806D1A2204B1C383757@ESESSMB209.ericsson.se> <5E88302B-9DA1-4752-A6C5-367D6F00FAB5@iii.ca> <51B20D64.7050600@alum.mit.edu> <ED508E23-575A-471A-90AB-3D5DF3D90314@iii. ca> <51B4B64B.1050101@alum.mit.edu>
In-Reply-To: <51B4B64B.1050101@alum.mit.edu>
Accept-Language: de-AT, en-US
Content-Language: de-DE
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-originating-ip: [172.29.42.225]
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
Cc: "mmusic@ietf.org" <mmusic@ietf.org>, Christer Holmberg <christer.holmberg@ericsson.com>
Subject: Re: [MMUSIC] Scope of RTP payload types in BUNDLE?
X-BeenThere: mmusic@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
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: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/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: Mon, 10 Jun 2013 12:48:53 -0000

> -----Urspr√ľngliche Nachricht-----
> Von: mmusic-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:mmusic-bounces@ietf.org] 
> Im Auftrag von Paul Kyzivat
> Gesendet: Sonntag, 09. Juni 2013 19:07
> An: Cullen Jennings
> Cc: mmusic@ietf.org; Christer Holmberg
> Betreff: Re: [MMUSIC] Scope of RTP payload types in BUNDLE?
> 
> On 6/8/13 12:11 AM, Cullen Jennings wrote:
> >
> > On Jun 7, 2013, at 11:42 PM, Paul Kyzivat 
> <pkyzivat@alum.mit.edu> wrote:
> >
> >> And then can't we demand that to support BUNDLE you must 
> also support PRACK?
> >
> > I think you will find the people that have not implemented 
> PRACK still don't want to implement PRACK. I know there is no 
> way I would want to mandate the complexity of PRACK just to do bundle.
> 
> They are willing to implement BUNDLE, and probably ICE and DTLS/SRTP, 
> and perhaps RTCWEB, but they find PRACK undesirable to implement???
> 
> I have no sympathy!
> Its time to join the 21st century.
> 
> I see no reason to struggle for ways to work around that if mandating 
> PRACK would solve the problem.

When ICE development there were similar arguments with respect to PRACK.
The consensus was the PRACK is recommended to be used.
If PRACK was not supported the answer is repeated until the first connectivity checks arrived at the answerer, meaning that the answer was received at the offerer.

Regards 
Thomas

> 
> 	Thanks,
> 	Paul
> 
> _______________________________________________
> mmusic mailing list
> mmusic@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mmusic
>