Re: [rtcweb] [MMUSIC] m-line recycling

Yes, some words about being compatible and all that entails are required if
we intend to stipulate it being reused. Either that or we can say MAY. The
need for a strong definition diminishes then.
On May 11, 2014 11:54 PM, "Christer Holmberg" <
christer.holmberg@ericsson.com> wrote:

>  Hi,
>
>
>
> I don’t think it should be a MUST – at least not only based on the media
> type. Because, there may be other properties than the media type associated
> with the “m=” line, why one does not want to use it for the specific MST.
>
>
>
> Regards,
>
>
>
> Christer
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> *From:* mmusic [mailto:mmusic-bounces@ietf.org] *On Behalf Of *Eric
> Rescorla
> *Sent:* 12. toukokuuta 2014 7:50
> *To:* mmusic WG; rtcweb@ietf.org
> *Subject:* [MMUSIC] m-line recycling
>
>
>
> The JSEP spec specifies m-line recycling:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>  o  If any MediaStreamTracks have been added, and there exist m=
>
>       sections of the appropriate media type with no associated
>
>       MediaStreamTracks (i.e. as described in the preceding paragraph),
>
>       those m= sections MUST be recycled by adding the new
>
>       MediaStreamTrack to the m= section.  This is done by adding the
>
>       necessary "a=msid", "a=ssrc", and "a=ssrc-group" lines to the
>
>       recycled m= section, and removing the "a=recvonly" attribute.
>
> Based on the minutes from IETF 89, we were going to take this to mmusic.
>
> http://etherpad.tools.ietf.org:9000/p/notes-ietf-89-rtcweb?useMonospaceFont=true
>
>
>
> Thoughts?
>
> -Ekr
>
>
>
> https://github.com/rtcweb-wg/jsep/issues/21
>
> _______________________________________________
> rtcweb mailing list
> rtcweb@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rtcweb
>
>