Re: [MMUSIC] Scope of RTP payload types in BUNDLE?

Bernard Aboba <bernard_aboba@hotmail.com> Thu, 06 June 2013 11:04 UTC

Return-Path: <bernard_aboba@hotmail.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 8426221F995C for <mmusic@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 6 Jun 2013 04:04:50 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -101.203
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-101.203 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, MIME_QP_LONG_LINE=1.396, 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 CVVzXjHrdbPx for <mmusic@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 6 Jun 2013 04:04:44 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from blu0-omc3-s6.blu0.hotmail.com (blu0-omc3-s6.blu0.hotmail.com [65.55.116.81]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id CB39A21F9955 for <mmusic@ietf.org>; Thu, 6 Jun 2013 04:04:38 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from BLU402-EAS92 ([65.55.116.73]) by blu0-omc3-s6.blu0.hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.4675); Thu, 6 Jun 2013 04:04:34 -0700
X-TMN: [F3ips0GhOh7FkXIwdHftZhYG9dlLBrOV]
X-Originating-Email: [bernard_aboba@hotmail.com]
Message-ID: <BLU402-EAS92C20BCCE71071A5F7072993980@phx.gbl>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
References: <749DCA95-2D40-46B3-9A3D-E63356C7A2C1@csperkins.org> <1892A917-C408-4E8F-AB19-206ED508762C@csperkins.org> <7594FB04B1934943A5C02806D1A2204B1C3799BC@ESESSMB209.ericsson.se> <4EDA75BD-D753-4153-929B-10427274224D@csperkins.org> <7594FB04B1934943A5C02806D1A2204B1C3799EE@ESESSMB209.ericsson.se> <599C780A-F483-470E-91F2-68DBA605C79C@csperkins.org> <7594FB04B1934943A5C02806D1A2204B1C379D6E@ESESSMB209.ericsson.se> <64C06EE8-A16D-4C3E-8A11-D6400F620A8E@csperkins.org> <7594FB04B1934943A5C02806D1A2204B1C379DC8@ESESSMB209.ericsson.se> <71ED9E54-DF0C-4DB9-A7F4-09A0BC90B177@csperkins.org> <51A3B070.1090006@alum.mit.edu> <FF8A3ABB-992C-48D9-856F-A6A21A35A0C1@iii.ca> <51AF5EEE.8080904@alum.mit.edu> <7594FB04B1934943A5C02806D1A2204B1C3836E7@ESESSMB209.ericsson.se> <51AF6BB9.3010807@alum.mit.edu>
From: Bernard Aboba <bernard_aboba@hotmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0 (1.0)
In-Reply-To: <51AF6BB9.3010807@alum.mit.edu>
Date: Thu, 6 Jun 2013 04:04:32 -0700
To: Paul Kyzivat <pkyzivat@alum.mit.edu>
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 06 Jun 2013 11:04:34.0046 (UTC) FILETIME=[A06591E0:01CE62A5]
Cc: "mmusic@ietf.org" <mmusic@ietf.org>, Cullen Jennings <fluffy@iii.ca>, Christer Holmberg <christer.holmberg@ericsson.com>
Subject: Re: [MMUSIC] Scope of RTP payload types in 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: Thu, 06 Jun 2013 11:04:50 -0000

On Jun 5, 2013, at 9:48 AM, "Paul Kyzivat" <pkyzivat@alum.mit.edu> wrote:

>> ISTM that the whole point of Plan A is that each m-line is associated with a specific use/rendering, and so it is essential to associate incoming packets with a particular one of the m-lines.

[BA] The above implies some interesting interactions with BUNDLE. For example, in H.264/SVC, in the unicast case, multiple layers are transported in the same RTP session, with or without BUNDLE. Therefore if each layer has its own m line, both sides MUST support BUNDLE to enable negotiation of layered coding even if there is no interest in bundling multiple media on the same RTP port. This is not true of Plan B ( or No Plan).