IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [MMUSIC] BUNDLE DISCUSION Q6: Do we always mandate 2 Offer/Answers during session establishment?

Martin Thomson <martin.thomson@gmail.com> Fri, 06 September 2013 20:09 UTC

Return-Path: <martin.thomson@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 20B8611E80EE for <mmusic@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 6 Sep 2013 13:09:59 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.602
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.602 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.002, BAYES_00=-2.599, 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 1GqEG54KDRpb for <mmusic@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 6 Sep 2013 13:09:58 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-we0-x236.google.com (mail-we0-x236.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:400c:c03::236]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 237DF11E80E7 for <mmusic@ietf.org>; Fri, 6 Sep 2013 13:09:57 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-we0-f182.google.com with SMTP id q59so2297207wes.41 for <mmusic@ietf.org>; Fri, 06 Sep 2013 13:09:56 -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=iwNb0Inpc5BKkYILk4F9dGRS7u1wBoJK+M5KbNNaM4s=; b=a3iT8AfPxteBptIIdgM/K3zbtkyiIPRhNd7GfCAoqPeUtVcSoF231HgeKo/Rv9kGlu 7Aip6Us3Yb4Aoc95Gcto3QhLgGBbnAR5e1CbYl0H1+q1PAMSM0gto0WnQd4bijEOg5W1 5CGdkqykSJb7/f+jI+5Eg4BZdibfq6BWhHOjE/Hcwll3mABKmJn372g/TFUmOHlrTkUQ FgUXnWePPhFOr1QAeMsV6en0TwUB4yLKRdfrLPxXHfsXkU4Eb2RSyH5sr4IH1I0jtHGx RclZ3pSN7jp1kpq4jwTZbiQEczop0uyNcnZDN6ADvlbT+H1odn3s4OKySDUq/COgz8Ib hFIg==
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.194.88.40 with SMTP id bd8mr2764621wjb.56.1378498196633; Fri, 06 Sep 2013 13:09:56 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.194.28.39 with HTTP; Fri, 6 Sep 2013 13:09:56 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <7594FB04B1934943A5C02806D1A2204B1C499BB7@ESESSMB209.ericsson.se>
References: <7594FB04B1934943A5C02806D1A2204B1C483C45@ESESSMB209.ericsson.se> <5224F4BB.8000904@alum.mit.edu> <CAOJ7v-20smCmAYG_be_4g2PwDigXKJu+x6yRkAzPXJ_YHWse-Q@mail.gmail.com> <522A27AB.1020102@alum.mit.edu> <CABkgnnWA7n7jy9T7cROTZSKrKAc9jCwb=68Whqt7qvVMgCQ8yA@mail.gmail.com> <7594FB04B1934943A5C02806D1A2204B1C499BB7@ESESSMB209.ericsson.se>
Date: Fri, 06 Sep 2013 13:09:56 -0700
Message-ID: <CABkgnnXBQobdfqVzrr=Mq9P9iDcZN=5TJze+Ld=HpN=iuhp6gQ@mail.gmail.com>
From: Martin Thomson <martin.thomson@gmail.com>
To: Christer Holmberg <christer.holmberg@ericsson.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Cc: "mmusic@ietf.org" <mmusic@ietf.org>, Paul Kyzivat <pkyzivat@alum.mit.edu>
Subject: Re: [MMUSIC] BUNDLE DISCUSION Q6: Do we always mandate 2 Offer/Answers during session establishment?
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: Fri, 06 Sep 2013 20:09:59 -0000

On 6 September 2013 12:46, Christer Holmberg
<christer.holmberg@ericsson.com> wrote:
> If you know that the other end supports BUNDLE, then why can't you assign the shared address to each "m=" line already in the FIRST Offer? Why assign unique addresses?

Exactly.  That's what I'd do.

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email