Re: [MMUSIC] WGLC for draft-ietf-mmusic-data-channel-sdpneg

[Flemming Andreasen <[e-mail]>]

On 3/6/16 7:04 PM, Christian Groves wrote:
> Hello Flemming and Juergen,
>
> ..snip..
>>> I agree that in such cases such new attributes could indeed be added 
>>> to corresponding data channel subprotocol specific attribute 
>>> registries, which then could refer to the document introducing this 
>>> new attribute.
>> Right - and for consistency I think it then makes sense to have all 
>> subprotocol-specific attributes registered there.
>>
>>> An alternative might be to only add such a new SDP attribute to the 
>>> generic IANA SDP attribute registry (which probably would be done 
>>> anyhow). I assume that the generic SDP attribute registry would also 
>>> refer to the document introducing this new attribute.
>>>
>> Either would work, however my preference would be a complete listing 
>> of attributes that have subprotocol specific meaning.
>>
>> I'd be interested in what other people think though
>
> From looking at the existing IANA registry 
> http://www.iana.org/assignments/sdp-parameters/sdp-parameters.xhtml
>
> It feels like we should take the approach for att-field (source level) 
> and define att-field (data channel).
>
Thanks for the feedback Christian. Just to be clear: We would need to 
allow for multiple entries per attribute, since different sub-protocols 
could each define sub-protocol specific behavior for an attribute.

Thanks

-- Flemming


> Regards, Christian
>
>>
>>
>> Thanks
>>
>> -- Flemming (with my individual hat on)
>>
>
> .
>