Re: [MMUSIC] JSEP Issue #394: What appears in m= lines.

Eric Rescorla <ekr@rtfm.com> Mon, 16 January 2017 13:45 UTC

Return-Path: <ekr@rtfm.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 E5B1612942F for <mmusic@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 16 Jan 2017 05:45:49 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.899
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.899 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=rtfm-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id L2orjqrQKFt9 for <mmusic@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 16 Jan 2017 05:45:48 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-yb0-x232.google.com (mail-yb0-x232.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4002:c09::232]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 8D550120725 for <mmusic@ietf.org>; Mon, 16 Jan 2017 05:45:48 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-yb0-x232.google.com with SMTP id w194so30378159ybe.0 for <mmusic@ietf.org>; Mon, 16 Jan 2017 05:45:48 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=rtfm-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=F/g/Iy5oFu+GQ+JUC7VyFOGo/qrhfGtQRn5j64JLJxI=; b=ns3BBa3OnO5R+IBV6wiWstsrdg0MNpksICbYZFAk1IGljgSTOKo9El6RGXMu5YipFO etEZD3fMCYiirdzTSUfuMQU/TTwbXGSUpnva9tscOfk97S1Fuqgqq6enMjqajL3ZYpGC oJyI4SGjacq5LpNOIdRobJ8XHqO51SBseAuIuS5Fj51laMkkZ3JVCUZU+0jjmoSVmR5H H29uCiVsCwYvGh0y56JIb9zoZxqCLG2DC5DksI1/JzkOX0unw4p6tQPMW1/YINXD9mp+ /Yarq7W8dvqGpg05iS5eBTkQxD5tJSAGWZuNJ4mjySnJbyfrzkVEv6c7K2xaHWgNscmB DU1w==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=F/g/Iy5oFu+GQ+JUC7VyFOGo/qrhfGtQRn5j64JLJxI=; b=Kg7ubuMsxNnBscNbdKFSTkP/idEdS9IqGKSFUD9dqChdl9g0VXsP/IaCEz/yhLEy2a IIlIAS5QI6gcEIZbrInRyB0i91a/aFlfAr6ak+7EfCpIy/WlNC8N0shls6vzb1JPhyid J3W7hP6w66iMUPTe+/qWBR4ZNI0je6GKDWjEu7FlF8xmaySY1WbvxkVfesYTot2updvn +QUK2162pADSiZr604H1HgYGg8M14Cdg2QGl6ch2b/FhUq7PXJrMl3awpol+o4UTSN8i 1zquEyIzcnhVBlyu/mfRHOchy5+XIHTUvj43jUTZkewHdOFciOLvCqpRjCuGsZZ50eZe eMWA==
X-Gm-Message-State: AIkVDXKzSCEVYZOELSO9vmHfztTpOH5Nmnhc1+iX7MQkqh3L9jHgnCEOs5eB+zJQ1otIN4Vo3j1nT/dMwp/rsg==
X-Received: by 10.37.201.196 with SMTP id z187mr3342161ybf.161.1484574347595; Mon, 16 Jan 2017 05:45:47 -0800 (PST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.13.204.80 with HTTP; Mon, 16 Jan 2017 05:45:07 -0800 (PST)
In-Reply-To: <D4A2966B.15C88%christer.holmberg@ericsson.com>
References: <52E4A8FC978E0241AE652516E24CAF001E483F95@ESESSMB309.ericsson.se> <CABcZeBPznLKNHek-SGE5Ly6QTOBL-j65sZBb5MbwQVkmBkpyFw@mail.gmail.com> <9110d772-9269-7fed-3ed4-5269d49acb84@alvestrand.no> <282955c7-d077-105b-6a99-a0f5ede87d91@ericsson.com> <CABcZeBPtMMR-xC_=pr1umBWY1CPkAm1J=T=Q_1F1bLNkZwtJkg@mail.gmail.com> <D4A2966B.15C88%christer.holmberg@ericsson.com>
From: Eric Rescorla <ekr@rtfm.com>
Date: Mon, 16 Jan 2017 05:45:07 -0800
Message-ID: <CABcZeBOS+b_bdgaTnQfsNAhdf7g=fspyYON2r5=BoKvPD-32Rw@mail.gmail.com>
To: Christer Holmberg <christer.holmberg@ericsson.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001a114d88eaa1cd38054636662f
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/mmusic/oJMp6E7jNXBGmCMnJVczQEdKnq0>
Cc: Magnus Westerlund <magnus.westerlund@ericsson.com>, mmusic WG <mmusic@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [MMUSIC] JSEP Issue #394: What appears in m= lines.
X-BeenThere: mmusic@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17
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: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/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: Mon, 16 Jan 2017 13:45:50 -0000

On Mon, Jan 16, 2017 at 5:28 AM, Christer Holmberg <
christer.holmberg@ericsson.com> wrote:

> Hi,
>
> …
>
> >>I hope at least we can agree that an JSEP Answer MUST use the PROTO
> string of the OFFER?
> >
> >Yes. I think implementations should offer UDP/ (ICE/ will cause problems)
> and in the answer echo the offer.
>
> This is related to the generic issue I raised in Seoul, and sent an e-mail
> about last week: is it ok to echo the transport in the m- line proto value
> of the answer even if the answerer doesn’t support the transport (alt #1)?
>
> OR, should we mandate a transport that everyone must support, and mandate
> to use that transport as m- line proto value in offers and answers (alt #2)?
>
> People in Seoul preferred alt #1, but I know that at least Roman prefers
> alt #2.
>

I continue to support #1. We should just stop trying to pretend that this
value has useful semantics.

-Ekr


>
> Regards,
>
> Christer
>
>
>