IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [MMUSIC] BUNDLE: Allowed to change local bundle port in SDP Answer?

Christer Holmberg <christer.holmberg@ericsson.com> Wed, 29 May 2013 10:10 UTC

Return-Path: <prvs=98619573fd=christer.holmberg@ericsson.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 AF02221F938E for <mmusic@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 29 May 2013 03:10:24 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -5.932
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.932 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.317, BAYES_00=-2.599, HELO_EQ_SE=0.35, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4]
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 WKr-J9PLgdlm for <mmusic@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 29 May 2013 03:10:18 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mailgw1.ericsson.se (mailgw1.ericsson.se [193.180.251.45]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id F102221F9360 for <mmusic@ietf.org>; Wed, 29 May 2013 03:10:17 -0700 (PDT)
X-AuditID: c1b4fb2d-b7f5d6d000003d54-d0-51a5d4087b27
Received: from ESESSHC003.ericsson.se (Unknown_Domain [153.88.253.125]) by mailgw1.ericsson.se (Symantec Mail Security) with SMTP id C0.0D.15700.804D5A15; Wed, 29 May 2013 12:10:16 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from ESESSMB209.ericsson.se ([169.254.9.167]) by ESESSHC003.ericsson.se ([153.88.183.27]) with mapi id 14.02.0328.009; Wed, 29 May 2013 12:10:16 +0200
From: Christer Holmberg <christer.holmberg@ericsson.com>
To: "Hutton, Andrew" <andrew.hutton@siemens-enterprise.com>, "mmusic@ietf.org" <mmusic@ietf.org>
Thread-Topic: BUNDLE: Allowed to change local bundle port in SDP Answer?
Thread-Index: Ac5cT7iTJh+UkTvAQrimrMBFim1gCAAAyq1AAABvM6A=
Date: Wed, 29 May 2013 10:10:15 +0000
Message-ID: <7594FB04B1934943A5C02806D1A2204B1C37B846@ESESSMB209.ericsson.se>
References: <7594FB04B1934943A5C02806D1A2204B1C37B7B6@ESESSMB209.ericsson.se> <9F33F40F6F2CD847824537F3C4E37DDF115B4EAE@MCHP04MSX.global-ad.net>
In-Reply-To: <9F33F40F6F2CD847824537F3C4E37DDF115B4EAE@MCHP04MSX.global-ad.net>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-originating-ip: [153.88.183.17]
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Brightmail-Tracker: H4sIAAAAAAAAA+NgFjrMLMWRmVeSWpSXmKPExsUyM+JvrS7HlaWBBkd2GVqc7etit5i6/DGL A5PHkiU/mTxu3H7PHMAUxW2TlFhSFpyZnqdvl8CdsfXUVPaCi1wVi9s/MzUwbuboYuTkkBAw kdjR8IIVwhaTuHBvPVsXIxeHkMBhRokDZ7vZIZwljBKHj60BynBwsAlYSHT/0wZpEBFIkvj9 aTkLSFhYwF3i/gULiLCHxK33LUwgYREBK4m+NUkgYRYBVYkDa4+wgdi8Ar4SF6atYQexhQQm MUpcvCEBYnMK+Eu8Pv+eGcRmBDrn+6k1TCA2s4C4xK0n85kgzhSQWLLnPDOELSrx8vE/VpBV EgKKEsv75SDKdSQW7P7EBmFrSyxb+JoZYq2gxMmZT1gmMIrOQjJ1FpKWWUhaZiFpWcDIsoqR PTcxMye93HATIzAODm75rbuD8dQ5kUOM0hwsSuK8eryLA4UE0hNLUrNTUwtSi+KLSnNSiw8x MnFwggguqQZGpSVL2fY1OT3esSfklNoNXx2F+wtWzwzhUdjsqGFnpyL14xZXNufsVQ3fV38V 7XGziT79avrp53rTFFZukBC80lnKsn1/Q321l9fVxNbcts/HH4a0TKnj3fRp46znfGXt/3Y3 pG4992WVnOzh8NvFj9LyhWYoyyw45J6ZKXrNYVK06WTvL2d8lViKMxINtZiLihMBeJYg+1YC AAA=
Subject: Re: [MMUSIC] BUNDLE: Allowed to change local bundle port in SDP Answer?
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: Wed, 29 May 2013 10:10:24 -0000

Hi,

> Cannot see why the answerer should be prevented from changing the port and even the connection address and 
> candidates etc. in any new answer any such restriction would seem to be a major diversion from existing offer/answer 
> procedures and I cannot see why we would want to consider it.
>
> We need to maintain the existing offer/answer procedures as much as possible.

Agree.

Regards,

Christer



From: mmusic-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:mmusic-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Christer Holmberg
Sent: 29 May 2013 10:36
To: mmusic@ietf.org
Subject: [MMUSIC] BUNDLE: Allowed to change local bundle port in SDP Answer?

Hi,

When the answerer receives the first bundle offer, it will assign a local bundle port. Nothing strange there.

Paul raised a question whether, when an updated offer is received, the answerer is allowed to change the local bundle port in the associated answer.

Personally, I can't think of a reason why it should not be allowed - no matter whether the offer contains different bundle ports or not - it would be according to normal O/A procedures.

If NOT allowed, if the answerer wants to change its local bundle port, it would have to send a new offer by itself (the details of such offer is discussed in another tread).

Comments?

Regards,

Christer

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email