Re: [MMUSIC] draft-holmberg-mmusic-t140-usage-data-channel-gateway considerations

Paul Kyzivat <pkyzivat@alum.mit.edu> Thu, 29 August 2019 15:21 UTC

Return-Path: <pkyzivat@alum.mit.edu>
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 136D81208ED for <mmusic@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 29 Aug 2019 08:21:00 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -4.2
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.2 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id NbOjt9SUPOZS for <mmusic@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 29 Aug 2019 08:20:59 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from outgoing-alum.mit.edu (outgoing-alum.mit.edu [18.7.68.33]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B98C41208FA for <mmusic@ietf.org>; Thu, 29 Aug 2019 08:20:58 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from Kokiri.localdomain (c-24-62-227-142.hsd1.ma.comcast.net [24.62.227.142]) (authenticated bits=0) (User authenticated as pkyzivat@ALUM.MIT.EDU) by outgoing-alum.mit.edu (8.14.7/8.12.4) with ESMTP id x7TFKvde024442 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NOT) for <mmusic@ietf.org>; Thu, 29 Aug 2019 11:20:57 -0400
To: mmusic@ietf.org
References: <49749CEF-41E8-4E87-8CC6-938DBDA0CEE7@ericsson.com> <3a2b4d58-7643-af3f-dda3-ea18fe65a0df@omnitor.se> <4A020B23-0BFE-4658-8A1C-2F05F960CED2@ericsson.com> <fb97da6c-4ca0-c6c7-101f-802d9b38ba20@omnitor.se>
From: Paul Kyzivat <pkyzivat@alum.mit.edu>
Message-ID: <8a663289-6560-4df5-7b76-4535a91ed907@alum.mit.edu>
Date: Thu, 29 Aug 2019 11:20:56 -0400
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.13; rv:60.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/60.8.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <fb97da6c-4ca0-c6c7-101f-802d9b38ba20@omnitor.se>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/mmusic/_vk1mEsgzlwhIJJe9KcP4b81AVw>
Subject: Re: [MMUSIC] draft-holmberg-mmusic-t140-usage-data-channel-gateway considerations
X-BeenThere: mmusic@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
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: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/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: Thu, 29 Aug 2019 15:21:01 -0000

On 8/29/19 5:07 AM, Gunnar Hellström wrote:
> Hi Christer,
> 
> Den 2019-08-29 kl. 10:37, skrev Christer Holmberg:

>> The data channel itself is always bi-directional. Now, if you want to 
>> allow usage of direction attributes for T.140 data I guess we would 
>> have to define usage of them inside a 'dcsa' attribute.
> 
> If it is common to use these attributes for muting etc in conferencing 
> scenarios for other media, I think they should be mentioned and 
> registered. The action on the T.140 data channel needs then be on 
> application level. That provides an opportunity to indicate in the user 
> interface that what the user types is not transmitted in case of muted. 
> If other mechanisms are usually used for other media, we could ignore 
> these attributes.

I think it may make sense to use sendonly/recvonly here. Doing so will 
require *some* document to specify that and update the registration of 
those attributes to indicate it.

But I don't think it is sufficient to simply add IANA considerations to 
update the registry. The use of sendrecv/sendonly/recvonly/inactive, as 
specified in rfc4566bis, is strongly linked (at least implicitly) to how 
RTP works. To use them in this new context I think there needs to be a 
document that discusses the details.

	Thanks,
	Paul