Re: [MMUSIC] Draft-ietf-mmusic-rfc4566bis-05: session-level attributes

Paul Kyzivat <pkyzivat@alum.mit.edu> Fri, 04 January 2013 02:09 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 5CF0C21F8D8E for <mmusic@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 3 Jan 2013 18:09:30 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: 0.213
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.213 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.650, BAYES_00=-2.599, FH_RELAY_NODNS=1.451, HELO_MISMATCH_NET=0.611, RDNS_NONE=0.1]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id JDzYhVo2aSTa for <mmusic@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 3 Jan 2013 18:09:27 -0800 (PST)
Received: from qmta07.westchester.pa.mail.comcast.net (qmta07.westchester.pa.mail.comcast.net [IPv6:2001:558:fe14:43:76:96:62:64]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9D14921F8D8C for <mmusic@ietf.org>; Thu, 3 Jan 2013 18:09:27 -0800 (PST)
Received: from omta14.westchester.pa.mail.comcast.net ([76.96.62.60]) by qmta07.westchester.pa.mail.comcast.net with comcast id jdeN1k0051HzFnQ57e9Tjo; Fri, 04 Jan 2013 02:09:27 +0000
Received: from Paul-Kyzivats-MacBook-Pro.local ([50.138.229.164]) by omta14.westchester.pa.mail.comcast.net with comcast id je9S1k00m3ZTu2S3ae9SA0; Fri, 04 Jan 2013 02:09:27 +0000
Message-ID: <50E639D6.90105@alum.mit.edu>
Date: Thu, 03 Jan 2013 21:09:26 -0500
From: Paul Kyzivat <pkyzivat@alum.mit.edu>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.7; rv:17.0) Gecko/17.0 Thunderbird/17.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Flemming Andreasen <fandreas@cisco.com>
References: <C15918F2FCDA0243A7C919DA7C4BE9940CDE1808@xmb-aln-x01.cisco.com> <50E60DDF.6070204@cisco.com>
In-Reply-To: <50E60DDF.6070204@cisco.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=comcast.net; s=q20121106; t=1357265367; bh=wD1o57vbonOKWxYT9hri5Bb+tqu1Y4Q5QIdarjzBWoY=; h=Received:Received:Message-ID:Date:From:MIME-Version:To:Subject: Content-Type; b=Ju/K26IsO3ltgb5D7HeLSwbT8l3i4eqx4hH7C5NjrHJ5wv7zX45aAT0//jsEwhEUN z6iwqZMC0GSCWR4+1Z+IqjK1FuOZjjBIPiy2t/iSNOWehEFPjOWy53YLn7XH3wq9mS 9SK2FrmqYySjnx8DflRBczIenlzyC8LbArCrzPkqsY1iAqWl1a6MdzZTsnoBhBEhmG kDOgi0MVZ9bPwG/efv8289mYu0CvcK88fLvmDyYwx0EIYM8Z4Uy3LTcXnPIm5WHcQr dYL0uDa5z6Y+P1vXJgK37NHFf6pLHzMORVGzHDKPdlJoIzjk6wHvp5R+IHUIT+jJZR GdDMdvI43B83A==
Cc: "mmusic@ietf.org" <mmusic@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [MMUSIC] Draft-ietf-mmusic-rfc4566bis-05: session-level attributes
X-BeenThere: mmusic@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
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: Fri, 04 Jan 2013 02:09:33 -0000

Once upon a time I thought that rule actually existed and worked, and 
that all attributes ought to have the "session is default for media 
level" property.

But then it became apparent that there were cases that didn't fit that rule.

When writing my last reply to this thread, and examining things more 
closely, it became apparent to me that this defaulting behavior doesn't 
work in many/most cases. The interesting cases that work something like 
that need to be described individually to cover the special cases that 
seem to apply almost all the time.

So I agree we are probably better off just not asserting it.

And at the same time we should polish up the definitions of the 
attributes defined in this document so that they are very clear how 
session and media level interact.

	Thanks,
	Paul

On 1/3/13 6:01 PM, Flemming Andreasen wrote:
> We clearly need an escape hatch as there are several examples of
> attributes with a given name that may occur multiple times to provide
> different values by use of additional qualifiers inside the attribute,
> and some of those attributes may appear at both the session and media
> level (capability negotiation for example uses this approach, as does
> "rtpmap", "fmtp", etc. inside a media description). In fact, I'd argue
> it's more than an escape hatch and probably more of a "default rule" in
> the absence of anything else specified for the attribute.
>
> In terms of the "choice" wording below, I think it's underspecified what
> that means, and I'm also not sure we really need a general rule here. Do
> we have other examples than the direction attributes currently ? If not
> (or we can't think of those), I'd rather just call those out explicitly.
>
> Thanks
>
> -- Flemming (as Individual)
>
>
>
> On 12/29/12 6:03 PM, Ali C. Begen (abegen) wrote:
>> I don¹t remember us reaching a consensus regarding the text proposed by
>> Brett. One thing certain is that we don't wanna break anything that
>> complies with 4566 but we should also make the text as clear as possible.
>>
>> I am OK with Brett's suggestion as I don't recall an attribute like what
>> Paul might have seen. But, even if such an attribute exists, the current
>> text would be incorrect, too (This would indicate a problem with that
>> particular attribute not 4566 or 4566bis).
>>
>> Brett's proposal does not make the text any worse. So, I am planning to
>> incorporate this change.
>>
>> Any objections?
>>
>> -acbegen
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Paul Kyzivat <pkyzivat@alum.mit.edu>
>> Date: Monday, August 27, 2012 12:03 PM
>> To: "mmusic@ietf.org" <mmusic@ietf.org>
>> Subject: Re: [MMUSIC] Draft-ietf-mmusic-rfc4566bis-05:
>> session-level    attributes
>>
>>> I've always thought this should be the way things work, for all
>>> attributes. But somewhere I came across an attribute (sorry, don't
>>> remember which one) where the attribute at session level means something
>>> different than the attribute at media level, and so can't be treated as
>>> a default for media level. (E.g. the session level is an aggregate limit
>>> for something, while the media level is a limit for a single m-line.)
>>>
>>> Am I just dreaming this? Or can someone identify specific attributes
>>> that behave this way?
>>>
>>> If there are existing attributes that behave this way, then we can't
>>> make a blanket statement like this. There will need to be an escape
>>> hatch. For example:
>>>
>>> "The connection ("c=") information in the
>>>   session-level section applies to all the media of that session unless
>>>   overridden by connection information
>>>   in the media description.  For instance, in the example
>>>   below, TBD..."
>>>
>>> "The attribute ("a=") information in the
>>>   session-level section applies to all the media of that session unless
>>>   overridden by connection information or an attribute of the same name
>>>   or choice in the media description, or the specification of that
>>>   attribute calls for a different treatment.
>>>   For instance, in the example
>>>   below, each media behaves as if it were given a "recvonly" attribute.
>>>   If the example had additionally contained a "sendrecv" media-level
>>>   attribute for audio, only the video media would behave as if it were
>>>   given a "recvonly" attribute."
>>>
>>> Even this could have some backward compatibility consequences. I think
>>> there are some attributes that are only defined for media level. This
>>> revision would mean that a session level value could override a default
>>> for media level. Implementations that aren't prepared for that might
>>> break.
>>>
>>>     Thanks,
>>>     Paul
>>>
>>> On 8/27/12 12:04 PM, Ali C. Begen (abegen) wrote:
>>>> Brett suggested the following change in the SDP draft. Any objections?
>>>>
>>>> -acbegen
>>>>
>>>> Current text:
>>>>
>>>> "The connection ("c=") and attribute ("a=") information in the
>>>>    session-level section applies to all the media of that session
>>>> unless
>>>>    overridden by connection information or an attribute of the same
>>>> name
>>>>    in the media description.  For instance, in the example below, each
>>>>    media behaves as if it were given a "recvonly" attribute."
>>>>
>>>> Proposed text:
>>>>
>>>> "The connection ("c=") and attribute ("a=") information in the
>>>>    session-level section applies to all the media of that session
>>>> unless
>>>>    overridden by connection information or an attribute of the same
>>>> name
>>>>    or choice in the media description.  For instance, in the example
>>>>    below, each media behaves as if it were given a "recvonly"
>>>> attribute.
>>>>    If the example had additionally contained a "sendrecv" media-level
>>>>    attribute for audio, only the video media would behave as if it were
>>>>    given a "recvonly" attribute."
>>>>
>>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>>> From: Brett Tate [mailto:brett@broadsoft.com]
>>>>> Sent: Wednesday, August 08, 2012 7:54 AM
>>>>> To: Ali C. Begen (abegen); mmusic@ietf.org
>>>>> Subject: RE: Draft-ietf-mmusic-rfc4566bis-05: session-level attributes
>>>>>
>>>>>>> Draft-ietf-mmusic-rfc4566bis-05 section 5 indicates the
>>>>>>> following.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> "In general, session-level values are the default for all
>>>>>>> media unless overridden by an equivalent media-level value."
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> "The connection ("c=") and attribute ("a=") information
>>>>>>> in the session-level section applies to all the media of
>>>>>>> that session unless overridden by connection information
>>>>>>> or an attribute of the same name in the media description.
>>>>>>> For instance, in the example below, each media behaves
>>>>>>> as if it were given a "recvonly" attribute."
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> If the attributes are related but with different names
>>>>>>> (such as "inactive" and "sendrecv"), does the attribute
>>>>>>> at the media-level have precedence over the value at the
>>>>>>> session-level?  If so, I recommend that the draft be
>>>>>>> updated to clarify the topic.
>>>>>> I believe so. at least that is my understanding from the
>>>>>> text. Does it really need clarification? Thoughts?
>>>>> I think that it should be clarified because it is unclear if "an
>>>>> attribute of the same name" indicates the typical situation or only
>>>>> situation concerning application of "unless overridden by an
>>>>> equivalent media-level value".  For instance if I sent "a=inactive"
>>>>> at session-level and "a=sendrecv" at media-level, I'd be concerned
>>>>> that the receiver may interpret the SDP as being
>>>>> abnormal (such as including both values at media-level) instead of
>>>>> allowing "a=sendrecv" to override "a=inactive".
>>>>>
>>>>> In case it matters from an extendibility perspective, requiring the
>>>>> same name might make it easier to recognize the override.
>>>>> However since section 6 already introduces complications with
>>>>> defaulting to "sendrecv" if a new option is defined/used and
>>>>> unknown, allowing the override even when the names are not the same
>>>>> doesn't make things too much worse; it actually
>>>>> allows communication of a backup attribute (such as "a=inactive") if
>>>>> they don't understand the preferred new attribute (such
>>>>> as "a=foo").
>>>>>
>>>>> "If none of the attributes "sendonly", "recvonly", "inactive",
>>>>> and "sendrecv" is present, "sendrecv" SHOULD be assumed as the
>>>>> default for sessions that are not of the conference type
>>>>> "broadcast" or "H332" (see below)."
>>>>>
>>>>> Thanks for the response,
>>>>> Brett
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> mmusic mailing list
>>>> mmusic@ietf.org
>>>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mmusic
>>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> mmusic mailing list
>>> mmusic@ietf.org
>>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mmusic
>> _______________________________________________
>> mmusic mailing list
>> mmusic@ietf.org
>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mmusic
>> .
>>
>
>