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

Paul Kyzivat <> Fri, 03 May 2013 15:43 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9A8BD21F9830 for <>; Fri, 3 May 2013 08:43:28 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -0.314
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.314 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.123, BAYES_00=-2.599, FH_RELAY_NODNS=1.451, HELO_MISMATCH_NET=0.611, RDNS_NONE=0.1]
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id HeiCDu9Bi0E2 for <>; Fri, 3 May 2013 08:43:20 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( [IPv6:2001:558:fe14:43:76:96:62:16]) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id F252F21F9687 for <>; Fri, 3 May 2013 08:01:22 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ([]) by with comcast id XNwz1l0040vyq2s51T1Muy; Fri, 03 May 2013 15:01:21 +0000
Received: from Paul-Kyzivats-MacBook-Pro.local ([]) by with comcast id XT1M1l00l3ZTu2S3RT1Mb3; Fri, 03 May 2013 15:01:21 +0000
Message-ID: <>
Date: Fri, 03 May 2013 11:01:21 -0400
From: Paul Kyzivat <>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.7; rv:17.0) Gecko/20130328 Thunderbird/17.0.5
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <>
In-Reply-To: <>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=q20121106; t=1367593281; bh=ijJLO39gjBEXykKk6h68s0NqX8DRoIA72tgbKZzfMqM=; h=Received:Received:Message-ID:Date:From:MIME-Version:To:Subject: Content-Type; b=oftiOKXQmwr4TJSQjHSWluvrY9mWH5NwS0Dcl3i56VIj+yQpwtnXVmxW1dB3Fb3Xk /Xve8IVZ6yUv9uemIgAk8JFFZhsNHSSpNnL+0ZTMbdLYQzbms9KZ8ntxyO4g7HzdjX 5fbvssWtHghxtuyvS3l9sdvxErglpCtSeHDsbLl3pA+btQtb/vWoV8HKO78MgieOIf czoXq+LgMoIumRcyP+d0DeK69tQespWPQIpBU9ejib7F7nxzB/7GJPvd771ooGvUi5 3kdqG7HsgaT64kYtyxrvilF3wB0aIQyN7HIS17Al1zB9bxZeXWBeg4hX92yQDezpHh M+FAgjXTDqfXQ==
Subject: Re: [MMUSIC] BUNDLE: Accept m- line, reject bundle
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: Multiparty Multimedia Session Control Working Group <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 03 May 2013 15:43:29 -0000

On 5/3/13 9:07 AM, Christer Holmberg wrote:
> 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.
> So, my suggestion would be to specify that the answerer must use Alt 2
> and/or Alt 3.

I don't think we should restrict flexibility here when it works and 
makes sense.

I agree that Alt 1 doesn't work *if* the m-line in question shares 
addr/prot with other m-lines that are also accepted, bundled or not. But 
the normal first offer won't present that situation. If the addr/port in 
the m-line in question is unique among all the accepted m-lines, then 
this should be acceptable.

(Note, this is a degenerate case of bundle splitting. There are real use 
cases for it. If it can be done without a 2nd o/a, then lets allow that.)