IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [rtcweb] Plan A, respun - bundle-only attribute

Christer Holmberg <christer.holmberg@ericsson.com> Tue, 07 May 2013 21:00 UTC

Return-Path: <christer.holmberg@ericsson.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 2F7E121F881C for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 7 May 2013 14:00:55 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -5.861
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.861 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.212, BAYES_00=-2.599, HELO_EQ_SE=0.35, J_CHICKENPOX_52=0.6, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4]
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 36iaD+ce3g0H for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 7 May 2013 14:00:49 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mailgw7.ericsson.se (mailgw7.ericsson.se [193.180.251.48]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8F61E21F8651 for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Tue, 7 May 2013 14:00:45 -0700 (PDT)
X-AuditID: c1b4fb30-b7f3a6d0000007a4-1d-51896b7c0833
Received: from ESESSHC002.ericsson.se (Unknown_Domain [153.88.253.125]) by mailgw7.ericsson.se (Symantec Mail Security) with SMTP id F2.45.01956.C7B69815; Tue, 7 May 2013 23:00:44 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from ESESSMB209.ericsson.se ([169.254.9.167]) by ESESSHC002.ericsson.se ([153.88.183.24]) with mapi id 14.02.0328.009; Tue, 7 May 2013 23:00:44 +0200
From: Christer Holmberg <christer.holmberg@ericsson.com>
To: Adam Roach <adam@nostrum.com>
Thread-Topic: VS: [rtcweb] Plan A, respun - bundle-only attribute
Thread-Index: Ac5LW3FEeMc+OMbaQO+bvWbaIxtpCAABvyFA///hggD//9sDAA==
Date: Tue, 07 May 2013 21:00:43 +0000
Message-ID: <7594FB04B1934943A5C02806D1A2204B1C36CE1B@ESESSMB209.ericsson.se>
References: <7594FB04B1934943A5C02806D1A2204B1C36CCC8@ESESSMB209.ericsson.se> <7594FB04B1934943A5C02806D1A2204B1C36CDD2@ESESSMB209.ericsson.se> <51896824.2000705@nostrum.com>
In-Reply-To: <51896824.2000705@nostrum.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: fi-FI
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-originating-ip: [153.88.183.146]
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Brightmail-Tracker: H4sIAAAAAAAAA+NgFjrNLMWRmVeSWpSXmKPExsUyM+JvrW5NdmegwYKZehZ7/i5it1j7r53d gcljyZKfTB6zdj5hCWCK4rJJSc3JLEst0rdL4MroXrGErWAWW0XfvomMDYyfWLoYOTkkBEwk TjWsgLLFJC7cW8/WxcjFISRwmFGiu+MqO0hCSGAxo8TX1bpdjBwcbAIWEt3/tEHCIgKKEm2H bzKD2MwC6hJ3Fp8DKxcWcJA4u3I5E0SNo8SZ/hmsIK0iAk4Sb19WgYRZBFQk9u94zApi8wr4 SpxbfYUJYu0mRoklc18zgiQ4BbQlzl35DFbECHTb91NrmCB2iUt8OHidGeJmAYkle85D2aIS Lx//Y4WwlSR+bLjEAlGvI7Fg9yc2CFtbYtnC18wQiwUlTs58wjKBUWwWkrGzkLTMQtIyC0nL AkaWVYzsuYmZOenl5psYgRFycMtvgx2Mm+6LHWKU5mBREudN5moMFBJITyxJzU5NLUgtii8q zUktPsTIxMEp1cCofq9UesMXgwz1aw76HQLilg/EjZKZNs1+xJG2bcGq+LWpp0uVektKPS2d piR0bV1V9lvXLcBHTv2Q/13R+Jesq/8feKs3r9jnjvfVYv51C78HZLGsDbfZ62HTm8oqdLl7 7s17999zb57FsK87mlf59huz55WqHAFFd/Xc1pmyLmZPWnzvKKsSS3FGoqEWc1FxIgBiMAvi XgIAAA==
Cc: "rtcweb@ietf.org" <rtcweb@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [rtcweb] Plan A, respun - bundle-only attribute
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: Tue, 07 May 2013 21:00:55 -0000

Hi,

>> Q3: Assume the answerer supports BUNDLE, and return an SDP answer with identical port numbers, as shown in section 7.1. I guess the second offer will 
>> then replace the zero port lines with the actual port value that the offerer uses for the multiplexing?
>
> I don't think it really matters, since the port number in these subsequent offers don't convey any additional information, but I'm perfectly happy with 
> the behavior you describe. I'm also happy keeping them set to zero, or specifying that they should be floor(pi * 10000) or any other arbitrary value.

Good - I just wanted to make sure that we stick to the agreed way forward on BUNDLE, which is based on sending a second offer with the actual port value.

Regards,

Christer

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email