Re: [MMUSIC] BUNDLE Weekly Summary: Assumptions

Christer Holmberg <> Mon, 13 May 2013 19:31 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4933A21F8E74 for <>; Mon, 13 May 2013 12:31:35 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -5.729
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.729 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.520, BAYES_00=-2.599, HELO_EQ_SE=0.35, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4]
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id WZAgwjei7uWW for <>; Mon, 13 May 2013 12:31:29 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id B392E21F885A for <>; Mon, 13 May 2013 12:31:22 -0700 (PDT)
X-AuditID: c1b4fb25-b7f396d000007d06-a3-51913f88807b
Received: from (Unknown_Domain []) by (Symantec Mail Security) with SMTP id 03.C1.32006.88F31915; Mon, 13 May 2013 21:31:21 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from ([]) by ([]) with mapi id 14.02.0328.009; Mon, 13 May 2013 21:31:20 +0200
From: Christer Holmberg <>
To: Paul Kyzivat <>
Thread-Topic: VS: [MMUSIC] BUNDLE Weekly Summary: Assumptions
Date: Mon, 13 May 2013 19:31:19 +0000
Message-ID: <>
References: <> <> <> <> <> <> <> <> <> <> <> <> <>
In-Reply-To: <>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: fi-FI
x-originating-ip: []
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Brightmail-Tracker: H4sIAAAAAAAAA+NgFrrKLMWRmVeSWpSXmKPExsUyM+JvrW6n/cRAgz1FFvsXn2e2mLr8MYvF ig0HWB2YPf6+/8DksWTJTyaPtmd32AOYo7hsUlJzMstSi/TtErgy/q7cx1Iwm79i7sm/zA2M r7m7GDk5JARMJPrXNzFB2GISF+6tZ+ti5OIQEjjMKHFqQRc7SEJIYAmjxPX9hl2MHBxsAhYS 3f+0QUwRAQ2JSVvVQCqYBXwlfl27DlYtLGAjMX3CS0YQW0TAVmJBwwMmkJEiAk2MEjMmX2IG SbAIqEqsm3UAzOYFav50qJcJYu8bVombPVvBujkFdCR+v7/DAmIzAh33/dQaJoht4hIfDl5n hjhaQGLJnvNQtqjEy8f/WCFsJYkfGy6xQNTrSCzY/YkNwtaWWLbwNdRiQYmTM5+wTGAUm4Vk 7CwkLbOQtMxC0rKAkWUVI3tuYmZOernRJkZg1Bzc8lt1B+OdcyKHGKU5WJTEeZO5GgOFBNIT S1KzU1MLUovii0pzUosPMTJxcEo1MNZnxgk9e76r5f/2c51ub7Uc8/7WzPA5GP9potOxWCun hzeYHbe+smxJL1RpW7FoaUC2UPp55poMg4Onlredn/PkaqvmnC33bX7ySW0WkJrZGPMkIV3L dtbGgvOTb8o6bQvR7p7oGtm+WnBHZcpEQ//VVQddF0YYdDd6ZUq/y+2qrEn3bZO4qsRSnJFo qMVcVJwIABLN7v5oAgAA
Cc: Jonathan Lennox <>, "" <>
Subject: Re: [MMUSIC] BUNDLE Weekly Summary: Assumptions
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: Multiparty Multimedia Session Control Working Group <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 13 May 2013 19:31:35 -0000


>>>> Q4:
>>>> We need to keep in mind that there is always a chance that the "top-most" m- line within a bundle group is a port zero one.
>>> What is the question?
>> Well, there are basically two "warm-up" questions:
>> Q4_1: When the first offer, with DIFFERENT port numbers is sent, and the receiver accepts bundle, is the receiver expected to be able to send media/data according to that?
> I hope so.

Ok, so let's stick to that assumption for now.

>> Q4_2: IF Q4_1 THEN which m- line does the receiver use to send media/data (when the second offer comes, with identical port numbers, it is no longer an issue).
> Surely the bundle draft must specify this.
> My first thought is that the address/port of the *first* m-line in the bundle with a non-zero port will be used for the entire bundle.
> (This means that when you initially offer a bundle with a bunch of separate ports, you not only must be prepared to use each of those for an unbundled m-line, you must be prepared to use any of them for the complete bundle.)

Yes, that is what I have been thinking also: until the second offer has been sent and accepted, the offerer has to be able to receive media on any of the offered ports.

Because, the offerer cannot assume that media will come on the *first* non-zero m-line in the offer, because the answerer could  reject it. 

OR, the answerer could accept the m- line but exclude it from a bundle, in which case it will only send media associated to that m- line to the offered port - and the bundled media will be sent to some other port of the offered bundle group.

These are issues that I've had from the beginning with offering different ports in a bundle group, so I would really like the people (Cullen, Richard E etc) that pushed for this to explain me how they intended to solve it  :)