Re: [MMUSIC] BUNDLE: Accept m- line, reject bundle

"Charles Eckel (eckelcu)" <eckelcu@cisco.com> Sat, 04 May 2013 04:40 UTC

Return-Path: <eckelcu@cisco.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 DD95421F8FE8 for <mmusic@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 3 May 2013 21:40:12 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -10.299
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-10.299 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.300, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-8]
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 sjZ6DR80mJQo for <mmusic@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 3 May 2013 21:40:04 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from rcdn-iport-6.cisco.com (rcdn-iport-6.cisco.com [173.37.86.77]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9AB7421F8FDB for <mmusic@ietf.org>; Fri, 3 May 2013 21:40:04 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=@cisco.com; l=1927; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1367642404; x=1368852004; h=from:to:subject:date:message-id:references:in-reply-to: content-transfer-encoding:mime-version; bh=eMs1cqlckTYQOKRX0BrYWLi4uT9i3wH3MtMASrVcWc0=; b=hfVI1+Zg2EMbrRdBvVdVuDIVG04Ka907radzC6vpuQm6f4PcPEkEj/Qp 8XGpCSF9HNQB4hLNHZO7GY9pq/JK3sMyDZk+r+8dfEMDImgQ+WX/hhJ5M GM3mkVFxWYrQj6sKdv30aXronc/7tX6d2v7cOoW0yIEgq2OIfsIkwrxI5 Y=;
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: AgEFAECQhFGtJXG8/2dsb2JhbABQgwe/bHwWdIIfAQEBAwE6SwQCAQgRBAEBCxQJBzIUCQgBAQQBEgiHfgbBbY8AOAaCbGEDqF6DDYIn
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.87,609,1363132800"; d="scan'208";a="206346245"
Received: from rcdn-core2-1.cisco.com ([173.37.113.188]) by rcdn-iport-6.cisco.com with ESMTP; 04 May 2013 04:40:04 +0000
Received: from xhc-aln-x03.cisco.com (xhc-aln-x03.cisco.com [173.36.12.77]) by rcdn-core2-1.cisco.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id r444e4v2017679 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=FAIL); Sat, 4 May 2013 04:40:04 GMT
Received: from xmb-aln-x08.cisco.com ([169.254.3.28]) by xhc-aln-x03.cisco.com ([173.36.12.77]) with mapi id 14.02.0318.004; Fri, 3 May 2013 23:40:03 -0500
From: "Charles Eckel (eckelcu)" <eckelcu@cisco.com>
To: Christer Holmberg <christer.holmberg@ericsson.com>, "mmusic@ietf.org" <mmusic@ietf.org>
Thread-Topic: BUNDLE: Accept m- line, reject bundle
Thread-Index: Ac5H/igNZNDXoaDWRAK0EIjSzLXMBAAP0M9w
Date: Sat, 4 May 2013 04:40:02 +0000
Message-ID: <92B7E61ADAC1BB4F941F943788C088280481F602@xmb-aln-x08.cisco.com>
References: <7594FB04B1934943A5C02806D1A2204B1C36B4F6@ESESSMB209.ericsson.se>
In-Reply-To: <7594FB04B1934943A5C02806D1A2204B1C36B4F6@ESESSMB209.ericsson.se>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-originating-ip: [10.21.65.131]
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
Subject: Re: [MMUSIC] BUNDLE: Accept m- line, reject bundle
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: Sat, 04 May 2013 04:40:14 -0000

> -----Original Message-----
> From: mmusic-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:mmusic-bounces@ietf.org]
> On Behalf Of Christer Holmberg
> Sent: Friday, May 03, 2013 6:07 AM
> To: mmusic@ietf.org
> Subject: [MMUSIC] BUNDLE: Accept m- line, reject bundle
> 
> Hi,
> 
> 
> 
> Assume the following case:
> 
> 
> 
> 1.       An SDP offer contains an m- line associated with a BUNDLE
> group
> 
> 2.       The answerer wants to accept the m- line, but wants to reject it
> being in the specific BUNDLE group.
> 
> 
> 
> A few alternatives on how this could be achieved have been
> presented:
> 
> 
> 
> Alt 1.      The answerer accepts the m- line, but does not associate it
> with a BUNDLE group.
>
> 
> 
> Alt 2.      The answerer accepts the m- line, associates it with a
> BUNDLE group, and then sends a new offer which removes the m-
> line from the BUNDLE group.
> 
> 
> 
> Alt 3.      The answerer rejects the m- line, and then sends a new offer
> which adds the m- line outside a BUNDLE group.
> 
> 
> 
> In my opinion, Alt 1 does not work, at least not if the offer contains
> identical port values for the m- lines associated with the BUNDLE
> group. It would mean that the m- line is not added to a BUNDLE
> group, but still has the same port value (at least at the offerer side)
> as the m- lines in the BUNDLE group, which is not allowed.

True, but isn't that precisely what will happen if the answerer does not understand/support BUNDLE?
So at this point the offerer could choose to send a re-INVITE to use different receive ports for the non-bundled m-lines.
I would not put that burden on the answerer.

Cheers,
Charles
 
> 
> 
> So, my suggestion would be to specify that the answerer must use Alt
> 2 and/or Alt 3.
> 
> 
> 
> Comments?
> 
> 
> 
> Regards,
> 
> 
> 
> Christer