Re: [MMUSIC] Review Request - draft-nandakumar-mmusic-sdp-mux-attributes-04
Jonathan Lennox <jonathan@vidyo.com> Fri, 18 October 2013 19:06 UTC
Return-Path: <jonathan@vidyo.com>
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 4D28B11E830F for <mmusic@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 18 Oct 2013 12:06:08 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.649
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.649 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.270, BAYES_00=-2.599, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, J_CHICKENPOX_14=0.6, RCVD_IN_SORBS_WEB=0.619]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id CFuWGdPjgH14 for <mmusic@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 18 Oct 2013 12:06:03 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from server209.appriver.com (server209d.appriver.com [8.31.233.119]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5A07011E8299 for <mmusic@ietf.org>; Fri, 18 Oct 2013 12:06:03 -0700 (PDT)
X-Note-AR-ScanTimeLocal: 10/18/2013 3:06:00 PM
X-Policy: GLOBAL - vidyo.com
X-Policy: GLOBAL - vidyo.com
X-Primary: jonathan@vidyo.com
X-Note: This Email was scanned by AppRiver SecureTide
X-Virus-Scan: V-
X-Note-SnifferID: 0
X-Note: TCH-CT/SI:0-145/SG:5 10/18/2013 3:05:50 PM
X-GBUdb-Analysis: 0, 162.209.16.213, Ugly c=1 p=-0.978697 Source White
X-Signature-Violations: 0-0-0-10736-c
X-Note-419: 15.6023 ms. Fail:0 Chk:1350 of 1350 total
X-Note: SCH-CT/SI:0-1350/SG:1 10/18/2013 3:05:53 PM
X-Note: Spam Tests Failed:
X-Country-Path: ->UNKNOWN->LOCAL
X-Note-Sending-IP: 162.209.16.213
X-Note-Reverse-DNS:
X-Note-Return-Path: jonathan@vidyo.com
X-Note: User Rule Hits:
X-Note: Global Rule Hits: G340 G341 G342 G343 G347 G348 G457
X-Note: Encrypt Rule Hits:
X-Note: Mail Class: VALID
X-Note: Headers Injected
Received: from [162.209.16.213] (HELO mail.vidyo.com) by server209.appriver.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 6.0.2) with ESMTPS id 66221768; Fri, 18 Oct 2013 15:06:00 -0400
Received: from 492133-EXCH2.vidyo.com ([fe80::50:56ff:fe85:6b62]) by 492132-EXCH1.vidyo.com ([fe80::50:56ff:fe85:4f77%13]) with mapi id 14.03.0146.000; Fri, 18 Oct 2013 14:05:59 -0500
From: Jonathan Lennox <jonathan@vidyo.com>
To: Suhas Nandakumar <suhasietf@gmail.com>
Thread-Topic: Review Request - draft-nandakumar-mmusic-sdp-mux-attributes-04
Thread-Index: AQHOuVx7/6GahdVxV0GQyPn7t3kaCJn1ry+AgAWcEQA=
Date: Fri, 18 Oct 2013 19:05:58 +0000
Message-ID: <6B861291-61A1-46D5-A208-767D6B17C2C7@vidyo.com>
References: <CAMRcRGQwY3XCLZh5LWL9STMTciLDr1XVv6sEgcDaBKfP2SMkpA@mail.gmail.com> <CAMRcRGSmMtik2v09A9qPYGFVOuLu01014t4ESJcu-AgPuuLJOQ@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAMRcRGSmMtik2v09A9qPYGFVOuLu01014t4ESJcu-AgPuuLJOQ@mail.gmail.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-originating-ip: [160.79.219.114]
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_6B86129161A146D5A208767D6B17C2C7vidyocom_"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Cc: mmusic <mmusic@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [MMUSIC] Review Request - draft-nandakumar-mmusic-sdp-mux-attributes-04
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, 18 Oct 2013 19:06:08 -0000
Hi, Suhas (and all) --
On these two sections:
Section 5.31 (Comedia over TLS) is correct; fingerprint is IDENTICAL.
For Section SDP Source Attributes (RFC 5576), I think there are two possibilities.
The simpler is to say that individual SSRC values in a=ssrc attributes MUST NOT be repeated across bundled m-lines, but other than that the behavior is normal.
The more complicated is to say that SSRC attributes MAY be repeated across bundled m-lines, iff the media stream satisfies more than one m-line. In this case, it's up to the individual source attributes to define what's allowed.
In neither case do these semantics match any of the named attribute categories, unfortunately.
On Oct 15, 2013, at 1:26 AM, Suhas Nandakumar <suhasietf@gmail.com<mailto:suhasietf@gmail.com>> wrote:
Hello Jonathan
I was wondering If you got chance to look at this review request.
Thanks in Advance
Cheers
Suhas
On Tue, Sep 24, 2013 at 12:29 PM, Suhas Nandakumar <suhasietf@gmail.com<mailto:suhasietf@gmail.com>> wrote:
Hello Jonathan,
Could you please help in reviewing the following sections from the SDP Attribute Multiplexing Draft
RFC 5576 - SDP Source Attributes
Section 5.14. 11.1
RFC 4572 - Comedia over TLS
Section 5.31
The document is available here:
http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-nandakumar-mmusic-sdp-mux-attributes-04<https://mail.cisco.com/owa/redir.aspx?C=w7rYxAQXeEarA5N757mxTXVKloXsjNAIAPyW3D5jnEI4O9PtoNPqlkh3YDtCmg2VP1atSVVhgMU.&URL=http%3a%2f%2ftools.ietf.org%2fhtml%2fdraft-nandakumar-mmusic-sdp-mux-attributes-04>
Thanks in Advance
Regards
Suhas Nandakumar
- Re: [MMUSIC] Review Request - draft-nandakumar-mm… Jonathan Lennox