Re: [MMUSIC] Mismatch between sdp-bundle-negotiation and RFC5888

On 12/2/18 1:57 PM, Christer Holmberg wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> I guess my question to the chairs/ADs is whether we could implement 
> Roman’s suggestion without having to take the document back to the WG etc.

Couldn't this be done with a *new* draft that update 5888 in this way?

	Thanks,
	Paul

> Regards,
> 
> Christer
> 
> *From: *Roman Shpount <roman@telurix.com>
> *Date: *Sunday, 2 December 2018 at 20.39
> *To: *Christer Holmberg <christer.holmberg@ericsson.com>
> *Cc: *"mmusic@ietf.org" <mmusic@ietf.org>
> *Subject: *Re: Mismatch between sdp-bundle-negotiation and RFC5888
> 
> On Sun, Dec 2, 2018 at 1:22 PM Christer Holmberg 
> <christer.holmberg@ericsson.com <mailto:christer.holmberg@ericsson.com>> 
> wrote:
> 
>      >>>>> I know this is a really late notice, but I think there is a
>     slight mismatch between RFC5888 and sdp-bundle.
>      >>>>>
>      >>>>> RFC 5888 Section 9.2
>     (https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc5888#section-9.2) says:
>      >>>>>
>      >>>>>   SIP entities refuse media streams by setting the port to
>     zero in the corresponding "m" line. "a=group" lines MUST NOT
>      >>>>>   contain identification-tags that correspond to "m" lines
>     with the port set to zero.
>      >>>>>
>      >>>>> Considering that sdp-bundle redefines the meaning of port
>     zero when 'bundle-only' attribute is present, RFC5888 will need
>      >>>>> to be updated to allow including bundle-only media streams in
>     the "a=group" lines.
>      >>>>
>      >>>>…or, one could argue that the text in RFC5888 only applies to
>     the case when port zero is used to refuse a media stream.
>      >>>
>      >>> One could argue this, but the language in RFC 5888 is quite blunt.
>      >>
>      >> So, you really want to bring BUNDLE back to the WG again?
>      >
>      > No, I really do not want to bring it back. Somebody implementing
>     BUNDLE asked me, so I wanted to ask on the list. I would suggest we
>     argue that
>      > BUNDLE overwrites all uses of port 0 to disable the media stream,
>     including the one in RFC5888.
> 
>     I don't think BUNDLE overwrites ALL uses of port 0 to disable the
>     media stream.
> 
>     In any case, my understanding was that you want to add something to
>     BUNDLE?
> 
> Ideally I wanted to add a section to sdp-bundle that updates RFC5888 and 
> specifies that mid can be added to the group even if m= line is disabled 
> with port 0, if this m line is enabled using other means, such as SDP 
> attribute. In other words something similar to section of sdp-bundle 
> that updates RFC 3264.
> 
> Regards,
> 
> _____________
> Roman Shpount
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> mmusic mailing list
> mmusic@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mmusic
> 