[MMUSIC] Some more APPID questions

Harald Alvestrand <harald@alvestrand.no> Sun, 03 November 2013 18:22 UTC

Return-Path: <harald@alvestrand.no>
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 F255E11E82CD for <mmusic@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 3 Nov 2013 10:22:10 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -110.599
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-110.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.000, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-8, 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 gZG3sGlrV7Ds for <mmusic@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 3 Nov 2013 10:22:05 -0800 (PST)
Received: from eikenes.alvestrand.no (eikenes.alvestrand.no [158.38.152.233]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A704011E82CC for <mmusic@ietf.org>; Sun, 3 Nov 2013 10:22:04 -0800 (PST)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by eikenes.alvestrand.no (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1A8ED39E176 for <mmusic@ietf.org>; Sun, 3 Nov 2013 19:22:04 +0100 (CET)
X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at eikenes.alvestrand.no
Received: from eikenes.alvestrand.no ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (eikenes.alvestrand.no [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id DbhIQhFLPjNY for <mmusic@ietf.org>; Sun, 3 Nov 2013 19:22:03 +0100 (CET)
Received: from [172.19.244.5] (unknown [216.239.45.130]) by eikenes.alvestrand.no (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 2610439E091 for <mmusic@ietf.org>; Sun, 3 Nov 2013 19:22:02 +0100 (CET)
Message-ID: <52769448.7080606@alvestrand.no>
Date: Sun, 03 Nov 2013 19:22:00 +0100
From: Harald Alvestrand <harald@alvestrand.no>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: mmusic <mmusic@ietf.org>
X-Enigmail-Version: 1.5.2
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Subject: [MMUSIC] Some more APPID questions
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 18:22:11 -0000

On reviewing the appid document and some of the mail on it.. some questions.

I understand that an appid can serve multiple purposes; FEC binding and
loudest-speaker selection being two examples.

Some of these give information that is completely outside the context of
RTP / SDP, so they have to be application specified. Others are within
the RTP/SDP ecosystem.
Thus:

- Can one SSRC have mulitple appids?
This seems necessary for those multiple functions to work at the same
time without treading on each other, but isn't stated explicitly in the
draft.

- What's the uniqueness criterion for appids?
It would seem logical to have them unique at the source, but at least in
one case (recv-appid), it is given by the destination. Are we depending
on statistical uniqueness, or is the uniqueness governed by some other
mechanism?

I'll send off these 2 questions now, in order to make the thread be
focused....


-- 
Surveillance is pervasive. Go Dark.