Re: [MMUSIC] Some more thoughts on the simulcast discussion

> However, a redundancy stream (FEC or RTX) will share the same RID value as the stream it’s protecting.
For RTX, that seems reasonable, since RTX is just a time-shifted repetition of something already having a RID.

If it is reasonable for FEC depends on what "entity" we decide a RID to describe.

Specifically, what about a FEC stream that protects multiple RTP streams; should it then be marked with multiple RIDs? That would mean that not only can different RTP streams share the same RID (although maybe not at once, but only time-multiplexed, if going with Jonathan's proposal), but a single (FEC) RTP stream would then also have multiple RIDs at once.

> -----Original Message-----
> From: mmusic [mailto:mmusic-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Jonathan Lennox
> Sent: den 16 oktober 2015 00:02
> To: Harald Alvestrand
> Cc: mmusic
> Subject: Re: [MMUSIC] Some more thoughts on the simulcast discussion
> 
> 
> > On Oct 15, 2015, at 5:00 PM, Harald Alvestrand <harald@alvestrand.no> wrote:
> >
> > [distraction: can two media streams have the same RID but different
> > SSRCs? What does that mean if it's legal? Where do we enforce the
> > restriction if it's illegal?]
> 
> I think only one encoded (or dependent) stream at a time can have a given RID value, but the mapping between RID and
> stream will change over time. (For the Selective Forwarding Unit RTP topology, it may change quickly, as in at speaker-
> switch speeds.)
> 
> However, a redundancy stream (FEC or RTX) will share the same RID value as the stream it’s protecting.
> 
> _______________________________________________
> mmusic mailing list
> mmusic@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mmusic