IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [MMUSIC] Last Call: <draft-ietf-mmusic-sdp-g723-g729-04.txt> (Offer/Answer Considerations for G723 Annex A and G729 Annex B) to Proposed Standard

SM <sm@resistor.net> Thu, 05 December 2013 00:11 UTC

Return-Path: <sm@resistor.net>
X-Original-To: mmusic@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: mmusic@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id ABF101ADFB9 for <mmusic@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 4 Dec 2013 16:11:54 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.49
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.49 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, MIME_8BIT_HEADER=0.3, T_DKIM_INVALID=0.01] autolearn=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 fkUG_B9w20V1 for <mmusic@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 4 Dec 2013 16:11:53 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mx.ipv6.elandsys.com (mx.ipv6.elandsys.com [IPv6:2001:470:f329:1::1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5EB251AE113 for <mmusic@ietf.org>; Wed, 4 Dec 2013 16:11:53 -0800 (PST)
Received: from SUBMAN.resistor.net (IDENT:sm@localhost [127.0.0.1]) (authenticated bits=0) by mx.elandsys.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id rB50Bdbd003828; Wed, 4 Dec 2013 16:11:42 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=opendkim.org; s=mail2010; t=1386202306; bh=WEI15BvktzgLJVxpZ+L9GnlSEaxVyG2IdkEyB4YV3+4=; h=Date:To:From:Subject:Cc:In-Reply-To:References; b=KR8IzCo0Z3gErjRGM4d8fBDvvfzj0ym1ATGTiEQTYye5GPWx+j534/hqFtJgjmUXl ILX1WRo8YJvLdup1XXT4U5XQN1xJj9YOHmFBBoD3gTH3sCoQSweMToKSvzh+0fng0I J1xKSzfT2NwQnzml6uRkxzNA5mEK+eVndM5v1vYQ=
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=resistor.net; s=mail; t=1386202306; i=@resistor.net; bh=WEI15BvktzgLJVxpZ+L9GnlSEaxVyG2IdkEyB4YV3+4=; h=Date:To:From:Subject:Cc:In-Reply-To:References; b=2CCY0NBlbl+MzTJkGwqkjW2uRIZi2x7uapwH/kUm8sbrd392ajIUiTuTh7WzQy8NU r4sHjImnICxGi5/fYtNRIFfZ0H3pmimm+hylVQwnGEpxmRbp8YnQmPBEIw0XrVu3T+ Q/fyVVUCE4JNb9T8m7UuiV8y9ivxwSMgLDHXjS9E=
Message-Id: <6.2.5.6.2.20131204150228.0d2a7170@resistor.net>
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 6.2.5.6
Date: Wed, 04 Dec 2013 16:03:01 -0800
To: "Muthu Arul Mozhi Perumal (mperumal)" <mperumal@cisco.com>, Ari Keränen <ari.keranen@ericsson.com>
From: SM <sm@resistor.net>
In-Reply-To: <E721D8C6A2E1544DB2DEBC313AF54DE22437429E@xmb-rcd-x02.cisco .com>
References: <20131030131748.6987.86198.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> <6.2.5.6.2.20131030185231.0ddfb7a8@resistor.net> <00a101ced981$77414d60$65c3e820$@co.in> <00ab01cee555$05f53560$11dfa020$@co.in> <6.2.5.6.2.20131119110213.0cb0dd40@resistor.net> <003301cee952$852cd120$8f867360$@co.in> <6.2.5.6.2.20131129000812.0bdaa088@resistor.net> <016d01ceed31$aa7a1130$ff6e3390$@co.in> <6.2.5.6.2.20131130003721.0d65a980@resistor.net> <E721D8C6A2E1544DB2DEBC313AF54DE22436AD4D@xmb-rcd-x02.cisco.com> <6.2.5.6.2.20131203011102.0db5d8c0@resistor.net> <E721D8C6A2E1544DB2DEBC313AF54DE2243737E1@xmb-rcd-x02.cisco.com> <6.2.5.6.2.20131204072722.0e064590@resistor.net> <E721D8C6A2E1544DB2DEBC313AF54DE22437429E@xmb-rcd-x02.cisco.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format="flowed"
Cc: "Flemming Andreasen (fandreas)" <fandreas@cisco.com>, mmusic@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [MMUSIC] Last Call: <draft-ietf-mmusic-sdp-g723-g729-04.txt> (Offer/Answer Considerations for G723 Annex A and G729 Annex B) to Proposed Standard
X-BeenThere: mmusic@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
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: Thu, 05 Dec 2013 00:11:55 -0000

Hi Muthu,
At 09:08 04-12-2013, Muthu Arul Mozhi Perumal (mperumal) wrote:
>Yes, is referring to that section of RFC4856. However, the issue is 
>not the registration itself -- it is to do with the missing 
>offer/answer considerations for the registered media parameters that 
>impact interoperability. As an example, RFC4352 registers AMR-WB+ 
>and then describes the offer/answer model considerations for the 
>parameters it registers.

I'll comment below.

>I don't think publishing it as an Informational RFC would improve 
>interoperability.

I was looking forward to read the above argument. :-)

The Introduction section of draft-ietf-mmusic-sdp-g723-g729-04 
mentions an issue which can affect interoperability.  It's a valid 
argument for choosing Standards Track.

I quote part of a message [1] from Keith Drage:

   "I do believe draft-ietf-mmusic-sdp-g723-g729 normatively impacts the
    usage of SDP in offer / answer usage and as such should be standards
    track."

That describes the problem the proposal tries to solve.  The proposal 
probably has to have some RFC 2119 key words (re. 
interoperability).  In my opinion the interoperability question does 
not fit in RFC 4856.  The issue is where to put the missing 
offer/answer considerations.  I took a quick look at several related 
RFCs and could not find the answer.  I suggest looking into what 
Keith Drage suggested.

The registration is a separate issue.  In simple terms, a person can 
take a look at the registry and find the appropriate specification 
where the media parameters are defined.

Maybe you could work from where the protocol is specified, explain 
the interoperability issue and propose the solution.  I have not been 
able to determine whether a registration update is needed.  I'll 
suggest reading RFC 4855.

Regards,
-sm

1. http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/mmusic/current/msg12856.html

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email