Re: [MMUSIC] BUNDLE TEXT: nettype/addrtype restriction [was: Draft new version: draft-ietf-mmusic-sdp-bundle-negotiation-05]

[Christer Holmberg <[e-mail]>]

Hi,

>I don't understand the point of this.
>
>I'm not aware of any general use of a nettype other than IN,

RFC 3108 defines an 'ATM' value.

draft-ietf-mmusic-sdp-cs defines a 'PSTN' value.

> or an addrtype other than IP4 or IP6, but I also don't see why the behavior of bundle is dependent upon this.

RFC 3109 defines 'NSAP', 'E164' and 'GWID' values.

draft-ietf-mmusic-sdp-cs defines an 'E164' value.

(Whether the semantics of the two 'E164' values are the same I don't know, but that's a separate issue).

> Any other choices that still have a notion of port sufficient to allow SDP O/A rules to apply should also work with bundle.

I see no reason to require an extension in such cases - especially since they are very unlikely to occur.

Regards,

Christer


> Based on the comments from Christian, I suggest the following new text for BUNDLE:
>
> -----------------------------
>
> 6.2.2.  Connection Data (c=)
>
>     The "c=" line nettype value [RFC4566] associated with each "m=" line
>     within a BUNDLE group MUST be 'IN'.
>
>     The "c=" line addrtype value [RFC4566] associated with each "m=" line
>     within a BUNDLE group MUST be 'IP4' or 'IP6'.  The same value MUST be
>     associated with each "m=" line within a BUNDLE group.
>
>     NOTE: Extensions to this specification can specify usage of the
>     BUNDLE mechanism for other nettype and addrtype values than the ones
>     listed above.
>
> -----------------------------
>
> Regards,
>
> Christer
>
>
>
>
> -----Alkuperäinen viesti-----
> Lähettäjä: [e-mail] [mailto:[e-mail]] 
> Puolesta Christian Groves
> Lähetetty: 15. lokakuuta 2013 3:05
> Vastaanottaja: [e-mail]
> Aihe: Re: [MMUSIC] Draft new version: 
> draft-ietf-mmusic-sdp-bundle-negotiation-05
>
> Hello Christer,
>
> The SDP grouping mechanism can be applied to different nettype/addrtypes. The BUNDLE draft appears to define behaviour related only to the nettype=IN and addrtypes=IPv4/IPv6. i.e. section 2 defines BUNDLE terminology based on IP.
>
> Is there an intention that the BUNDLE mechanism is only used for the above net and addrtypes? If so should it be mentioned somewhere in the applicability statement?
>
> Regards, Christian
>
> On 14/10/2013 10:37 PM, Christer Holmberg wrote:
>>
>> Hi,
>>
>> I've submitted a new version of the BUNDLE draft.
>>
>> I have implemented the modified text for the Offerer and Answerer 
>> procedures, as presented on the list in September.
>>
>> The procedures now also mention the usage of the SDP 'bundle-only'
>> attribute. However, the attribute definition itself has yet not been 
>> added to the draft, as we still haven't solved the issue regarding 
>> usage of port zero.
>>
>> In addition, there are some reference corrections, and the FQDN 
>> values in the examples are now according to RFC 2606.
>>
>> Regards,
>>
>> Christer
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> mmusic mailing list
>> [e-mail]
>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mmusic
>
> _______________________________________________
> mmusic mailing list
> [e-mail]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mmusic
> _______________________________________________
> mmusic mailing list
> [e-mail]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mmusic
>

_______________________________________________
mmusic mailing list
[e-mail]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mmusic