RE: [MMUSIC] SDPCapNeg Issue #5: Media before answer

"Dan Wing" <dwing@cisco.com> Tue, 26 June 2007 15:25 UTC

Return-path: <mmusic-bounces@ietf.org>
Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1I3CvR-0000La-SU; Tue, 26 Jun 2007 11:25:53 -0400
Received: from [10.91.34.44] (helo=ietf-mx.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1I3CvQ-0000Kg-DE for mmusic@ietf.org; Tue, 26 Jun 2007 11:25:52 -0400
Received: from sj-iport-3-in.cisco.com ([171.71.176.72] helo=sj-iport-3.cisco.com) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1I3CvM-0003lm-2B for mmusic@ietf.org; Tue, 26 Jun 2007 11:25:52 -0400
Received: from sj-dkim-2.cisco.com ([171.71.179.186]) by sj-iport-3.cisco.com with ESMTP; 26 Jun 2007 08:25:47 -0700
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: Ao8CAK/MgEarR7O6/2dsb2JhbAA
X-IronPort-AV: i="4.16,464,1175497200"; d="scan'208"; a="497777980:sNHT34507418"
Received: from sj-core-4.cisco.com (sj-core-4.cisco.com [171.68.223.138]) by sj-dkim-2.cisco.com (8.12.11/8.12.11) with ESMTP id l5QFPlCY005490; Tue, 26 Jun 2007 08:25:47 -0700
Received: from dwingwxp (sjc-vpn6-185.cisco.com [10.21.120.185]) by sj-core-4.cisco.com (8.12.10/8.12.6) with ESMTP id l5QFPkGX023958; Tue, 26 Jun 2007 15:25:46 GMT
From: Dan Wing <dwing@cisco.com>
To: 'Flemming Andreasen' <fandreas@cisco.com>, 'mmusic' <mmusic@ietf.org>
Subject: RE: [MMUSIC] SDPCapNeg Issue #5: Media before answer
Date: Tue, 26 Jun 2007 08:25:45 -0700
Message-ID: <00c301c7b806$44dd0b00$b978150a@amer.cisco.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Microsoft Office Outlook 11
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.3138
In-Reply-To: <467FF802.9050909@cisco.com>
Thread-Index: Ace3TFqsc+f0k6bbT2u+Sb26Evv/dwAaLDlg
DKIM-Signature: v=0.5; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; l=2010; t=1182871547; x=1183735547; c=relaxed/simple; s=sjdkim2002; h=Content-Type:From:Subject:Content-Transfer-Encoding:MIME-Version; d=cisco.com; i=dwing@cisco.com; z=From:=20=22Dan=20Wing=22=20<dwing@cisco.com> |Subject:=20RE=3A=20[MMUSIC]=20SDPCapNeg=20Issue=20#5=3A=20Media=20before =20answer |Sender:=20; bh=bqJZdNYUzjQRP1z2MGYUklX+bdBc48P3BaxZ6EOk90c=; b=zf4RcgdkJJUoioVmGMivpJoRR6w3qF3bwtsoK7U007b4G130DeiS35QBQCZo/mJ2ffSFOZwd MjHykrHuN8ST3shGLklus5ivGeFnZ6CLTk4vjzti7ynzHBs5mnbWQwM3;
Authentication-Results: sj-dkim-2; header.From=dwing@cisco.com; dkim=pass (s ig from cisco.com/sjdkim2002 verified; );
X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/)
X-Scan-Signature: 50a516d93fd399dc60588708fd9a3002
Cc:
X-BeenThere: mmusic@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
List-Id: Multiparty Multimedia Session Control Working Group <mmusic.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mmusic>, <mailto:mmusic-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Post: <mailto:mmusic@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:mmusic-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mmusic>, <mailto:mmusic-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: mmusic-bounces@ietf.org

Was the use of a payload type for this, as mentioned in
draft-kaplan-mmusic-best-effort-srtp-01, considered and discarded?  I'm fine
if it was, I'm just asking.  It seemed useful although it only increases the
chances of not playing garbage (because you don't know until you get the
answer if the answerer understood that technique).

-d

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Flemming Andreasen [mailto:fandreas@cisco.com] 
> Sent: Monday, June 25, 2007 10:15 AM
> To: mmusic
> Subject: [MMUSIC] SDPCapNeg Issue #5: Media before answer
> 
> The answerer may select a potential configuration containing 
> parameters that require the offerer to receive the answer 
> before he can process media correctly. The issue is explained 
> in Section 3.8 in the SDP Capability Negotiation framework, 
> where one possible solutions is outlined (preconditions), but 
> not actually specified. The question was raised whether we 
> want to say more about this issue and if we want to define 
> additional solutions to it. For example, Jonathan Rosenberg 
> suggested that use of ICE can help the answerer determine 
> when the answer has been received by the offerer and hence it 
> is safe to send media to the offerer. 
> 
> The design team discussed this issue in Prague and agreed to 
> elaborate slightly on the current text. It will be noted that 
> the offerer can discard media until he receives the answer, 
> if he wants to make sure he doesn't play garbage. If the 
> offerer wants to avoid clipping on the other hand, he can 
> play media as soon as it is received, but at the risk of 
> playing garbage. To avoid both, a three-way handshake is 
> needed (e.g. precondtion), however that is outside the basic 
> SDP Capability Negotiation. We will add a note to mention the 
> use of ICE (STUN) as a possible solution to this three-way 
> handshake as well. 
> 
> If you disagree with this, please let me know. 
> 
> Thanks
> 
> -- Flemming 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 

_______________________________________________
mmusic mailing list
mmusic@ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mmusic