IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [MMUSIC] Partial Offer/Partial Answer draft

Adam Roach <adam@nostrum.com> Tue, 15 October 2013 20:40 UTC

Return-Path: <adam@nostrum.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 9B16D11E820E for <mmusic@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 15 Oct 2013 13:40:33 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -102.354
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.354 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.246, BAYES_00=-2.599, SPF_PASS=-0.001, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
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 W+EsYpFD5oRa for <mmusic@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 15 Oct 2013 13:40:33 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from shaman.nostrum.com (nostrum-pt.tunnel.tserv2.fmt.ipv6.he.net [IPv6:2001:470:1f03:267::2]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5E7C111E81EA for <mmusic@ietf.org>; Tue, 15 Oct 2013 13:40:29 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from orochi.roach.at (99-152-145-110.lightspeed.dllstx.sbcglobal.net [99.152.145.110]) (authenticated bits=0) by shaman.nostrum.com (8.14.3/8.14.3) with ESMTP id r9FKeOUq000989 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-CAMELLIA256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Tue, 15 Oct 2013 15:40:25 -0500 (CDT) (envelope-from adam@nostrum.com)
Message-ID: <525DA833.3010602@nostrum.com>
Date: Tue, 15 Oct 2013 15:40:19 -0500
From: Adam Roach <adam@nostrum.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.8; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.0.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Martin Thomson <martin.thomson@gmail.com>
References: <525C7537.4080209@nostrum.com> <CABkgnnV+VihxB1X_KdaG5fAAVfuk2s06fQKApxFHWd_wG8Wksw@mail.gmail.com> <C5BA15C5-34BF-4ACA-B41A-B65927801346@nostrum.com> <CABkgnnV1aXP6LJ6KYsob4TbG2H5o0+4532AxGBA6npGm5DjbNg@mail.gmail.com> <525CB632.3030602@nostrum.com> <CABkgnnWZaNoUjpQ4ZX55iZKS7GgzsvrB_fSTe7d1THHtyFo65Q@mail.gmail.com> <525D75C8.70607@nostrum.com> <CABkgnnV-wifOnrgv6XNwBdXyL8CeOAkz1A1TeX-3cHkbYxzitw@mail.gmail.com> <525D8779.60901@nostrum.com> <CABkgnnX98Ap9DAQ1PznwVCWr7g=cg79onbduhbjF2F7KuVVYpQ@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CABkgnnX98Ap9DAQ1PznwVCWr7g=cg79onbduhbjF2F7KuVVYpQ@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received-SPF: pass (shaman.nostrum.com: 99.152.145.110 is authenticated by a trusted mechanism)
Cc: "mmusic@ietf.org" <mmusic@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [MMUSIC] Partial Offer/Partial Answer draft
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: Tue, 15 Oct 2013 20:40:33 -0000

On 10/15/13 15:25, Martin Thomson wrote:
> On 15 October 2013 11:20, Adam Roach <adam@nostrum.com> wrote:
>> Oh, I see. You're throwing 5888 out the window.
>> ...
> Yep, intentionally.  I think that the effect of what you have proposed
> is the same, or close enough that it doesn't matter

How so? With what I propose, the resulting SDP that each side has at the 
end of the transaction is identical to that which would result from a 
full offer/answer exchange using RFC5888.

/a

v2.46.0 | Report a Bug | By Email | System Status