Re: [rtcweb] draft-ietf-rtcweb-jsep-05 - Subsequent Offers

"Hutton, Andrew" <andrew.hutton@unify.com> Wed, 06 November 2013 22:14 UTC

Return-Path: <andrew.hutton@unify.com>
X-Original-To: rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1224E21E8095 for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 6 Nov 2013 14:14:12 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.471
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.471 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.128, BAYES_00=-2.599]
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 jHPby8MK5GH0 for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 6 Nov 2013 14:14:07 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mx11.unify.com (mx11.unify.com [62.134.46.9]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DBEF621E8156 for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Wed, 6 Nov 2013 14:14:06 -0800 (PST)
Received: from MCHP01HTC.global-ad.net (unknown [172.29.42.234]) by mx11.unify.com (Server) with ESMTP id 4F3A01EB858C; Wed, 6 Nov 2013 23:14:06 +0100 (CET)
Received: from MCHP04MSX.global-ad.net ([169.254.1.69]) by MCHP01HTC.global-ad.net ([172.29.42.234]) with mapi id 14.03.0123.003; Wed, 6 Nov 2013 23:14:05 +0100
From: "Hutton, Andrew" <andrew.hutton@unify.com>
To: Martin Thomson <martin.thomson@gmail.com>
Thread-Topic: [rtcweb] draft-ietf-rtcweb-jsep-05 - Subsequent Offers
Thread-Index: AQHO2zhhRkimDg8HS1yf9W6X1FrNbJoYwKAg///xAoCAABHpQA==
Date: Wed, 6 Nov 2013 22:14:05 +0000
Message-ID: <9F33F40F6F2CD847824537F3C4E37DDF17C33847@MCHP04MSX.global-ad.net>
References: <527420FC.3070805@alum.mit.edu> <CAOJ7v-3tMLV0Zs5po_1daWuVaMPtrZK0g+L=kzPnLd0jGtfRXQ@mail.gmail.com> <CAPms+wQMN9+=wy5EJX0LUwZQRrJk2HebbJOADhhGeQpm2jzO8g@mail.gmail.com> <CAOJ7v-0UmZcuYbEzY5Z5WhFw7x_qP2pgntWEY_3byhNWTJqbnA@mail.gmail.com> <CAOJ7v-0c4F9i2Pkc0kjGkhcVDV227EiCH7PdLY--PKmcUMkG2Q@mail.gmail.com> <9F33F40F6F2CD847824537F3C4E37DDF17C337D0@MCHP04MSX.global-ad.net> <CABkgnnUtjB3Up50nKpALFoG9i47MCXME-98Cju0XTp5r_7z57Q@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CABkgnnUtjB3Up50nKpALFoG9i47MCXME-98Cju0XTp5r_7z57Q@mail.gmail.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-originating-ip: [172.29.42.225]
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64
MIME-Version: 1.0
Cc: "rtcweb@ietf.org" <rtcweb@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [rtcweb] draft-ietf-rtcweb-jsep-05 - Subsequent Offers
X-BeenThere: rtcweb@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: Real-Time Communication in WEB-browsers working group list <rtcweb.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/rtcweb>, <mailto:rtcweb-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/rtcweb>
List-Post: <mailto:rtcweb@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:rtcweb-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rtcweb>, <mailto:rtcweb-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 06 Nov 2013 22:14:12 -0000

On: 06 November 2013 14:06 Martin Thomson Wrote:
> The question in the room was:
> 
> Given a negotiated session with "A, B, and C", is an endpoint
> permitted to create an offer that includes "D"?
> 
> A great many people said yes, because that is how SDP is most commonly
> used.
> 

Yes that was my understanding as well and what I thought was meant be renegotiating codecs. There must be a way for the new offer to contain the full set of capabilities which might be greater than those previously negotiated.

Andy