Re: [MMUSIC] BUNDLE/SDP : ISSUE#1: Should BUNDLE allow/disallow PT sharing ??
Suhas Nandakumar <suhasietf@gmail.com> Sun, 03 November 2013 06:08 UTC
Return-Path: <suhasietf@gmail.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 76B6811E810A for <mmusic@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 2 Nov 2013 23:08:58 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.961
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.961 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.038, BAYES_00=-2.599, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, J_CHICKENPOX_15=0.6, NO_RELAYS=-0.001]
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 sOHZZnmRLOzp for <mmusic@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 2 Nov 2013 23:08:57 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-wg0-x230.google.com (mail-wg0-x230.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:400c:c00::230]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3BC2311E8178 for <mmusic@ietf.org>; Sat, 2 Nov 2013 23:08:53 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-wg0-f48.google.com with SMTP id b13so933161wgh.3 for <mmusic@ietf.org>; Sat, 02 Nov 2013 23:08:52 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type; bh=+d6MpittXP0D91lJKvd3OY2gCrEDmeL7+OD2bT1Zvf8=; b=QpEqy2JH+fORTqAAYrERq10i0b6hcTyDdWmgsEt1b96aTj3gz11soctX85EPiVztLO af9mO1mi+e//0CjsPtf4Wz7NHNJhRzj+BKmKb4i9ZZvUP6a61ykY5V+RNlNMV8G9PoO2 p4uSZMuJJjRqY7y0tEl27oKuxDkzxGPjMDYW1gE3HnCbAr8IdEi7yhA9S9jXPGwynLTM au9Fg7eyodbmskgoPCmQVPrtgpTwAwHYketGS+ie3vhFrAgRJk5Z9fSNauhELJprWj+A J5gyPL6/C6rL2MUFSHAaBo5bkPdM7CrxDqyYiFNGBYYLgMRQZ6qPAdPyhGCSAW+7Md22 7JJg==
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.194.175.202 with SMTP id cc10mr14924wjc.48.1383458932468; Sat, 02 Nov 2013 23:08:52 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.194.178.231 with HTTP; Sat, 2 Nov 2013 23:08:52 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <CAOqqYVFrucCg-Q066f4hf_86f3cLZsgDX8QgcD1g0sP41zro7Q@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAMRcRGQd6YvrWnUw77JMpNT4GFH6ce-FT8LxeywV6_pZ9w=n3w@mail.gmail.com> <CAOqqYVFrucCg-Q066f4hf_86f3cLZsgDX8QgcD1g0sP41zro7Q@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Sat, 02 Nov 2013 23:08:52 -0700
Message-ID: <CAMRcRGRr1rcOTY7CWRhAfQVxxqtGVO6nBL2HMTRRSS-muLhttA@mail.gmail.com>
From: Suhas Nandakumar <suhasietf@gmail.com>
To: Harald Alvestrand <hta@google.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="089e013d0f483b30a504ea3fa243"
Cc: Cullen Jennings <fluffy@cisco.com>, mmusic WG <mmusic@ietf.org>, Christer Holmberg <christer.holmberg@ericsson.com>
Subject: Re: [MMUSIC] BUNDLE/SDP : ISSUE#1: Should BUNDLE allow/disallow PT sharing ??
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: Sun, 03 Nov 2013 06:08:58 -0000
Hello Harald Thanks for the inputs. I had a clarifying question on one of your points (inline) Cheers Suhas On Tue, Oct 22, 2013 at 12:55 AM, Harald Alvestrand <hta@google.com> wrote: > 0: No, using PT 98 for both audio and video should absolutely not be > allowed. Reuse of a PT for different codecs MUST NOT be done. I thought > that was pretty clear in BUNDLE already; if it's not 100% crystal clear, it > needs to be made clear. > > 1: Either the SDP should be rejected outright or the response to this SDP > needs to disallow bundling those two lines. This belongs in the BUNDLE > spec, and I thought it was pretty clear already. > > 2: If the question is about the "a=rtcp-fb" field, I think it should be > classified as NORMAL. If it is about "a=rtcp-fb:98", it makes more sense to > call it IDENTICAL. > If the PT types are not allowed to be repeated across BUNDLED m=lines, would we have a need for the category to be IDENTICAL even in the case of a=rtcpfb:98 ?? > > > > On Tue, Oct 22, 2013 at 8:36 AM, Suhas Nandakumar <suhasietf@gmail.com>wrote: > >> Hello All >> >> Section 5.2 in the draft-nandakumar-mmusic-sdp-mux-attributes-05 >> defines one category of OPEN ISSUE that was raised while analyzing >> multiplexing behavior of RFC4855, RFC5583 attributes for example. >> >> As an example, let's consider the SDP Example (copied from the draft) >> >> >> // PTs are shared and have different feedback types >> a=group:BUNDLE audio video >> m=audio 3456 RTP/AVP 98 >> a=mid:audio >> a=rtpmap:98 iLBC/8000 >> a=rtcp-fb ack // Positive ACK >> m=video 3456 RTP/AVP 98 >> a=mid:video >> a=rtpmap:98 VP8/90000 >> a-rtcp-fb:98 nack rpsi // Nack ACK >> >> >> In the above case, PT 98 is repeated between the audio and video media >> lines. Audio media line has rtcp-fb ack and video media line has rtcp-fb >> nack. >> >> Since RTCP reporting happens per RTP Session, we can see the following >> high level questions : >> >> 0. Should this be allowed ? >> >> 1. What should be the expected behavior in this scenario ? >> >> 2. What category assignment makes sense in here - IDENTICAL or NORMAL ?? >> >> >> Cheers >> Suhas >> >> >> >
- [MMUSIC] BUNDLE/SDP : ISSUE#1: Should BUNDLE allo… Suhas Nandakumar
- Re: [MMUSIC] BUNDLE/SDP : ISSUE#1: Should BUNDLE … Christer Holmberg
- Re: [MMUSIC] BUNDLE/SDP : ISSUE#1: Should BUNDLE … Christer Holmberg
- Re: [MMUSIC] BUNDLE/SDP : ISSUE#1: Should BUNDLE … Harald Alvestrand
- Re: [MMUSIC] BUNDLE/SDP : ISSUE#1: Should BUNDLE … Suhas Nandakumar
- Re: [MMUSIC] BUNDLE/SDP : ISSUE#1: Should BUNDLE … Harald Alvestrand