IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [rtcweb] Working Group Last Call for draft-uberti-rtcweb-rfc8829bis-01.txt

Roman Shpount <roman@telurix.com> Tue, 02 November 2021 08:41 UTC

Return-Path: <roman@telurix.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 196373A0F46 for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 2 Nov 2021 01:41:18 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.098
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.098 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=telurix.com
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id TXWTyi62HX6p for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 2 Nov 2021 01:41:13 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-qk1-x734.google.com (mail-qk1-x734.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::734]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 36ABB3A0F41 for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Tue, 2 Nov 2021 01:41:13 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-qk1-x734.google.com with SMTP id br39so5781678qkb.8 for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Tue, 02 Nov 2021 01:41:13 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=telurix.com; s=google; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=cDZyd6dJj5yPJiHF6KG05hdGGqle0Fn++2ilOo0nEy8=; b=vdrR/J5HMh6Guyu/zGhNxt9GJdTOMSj1ghi+zRoKBBADjUp4VcCWjJgzf8lob+9ZoD yHZgZgOfTVGDkED9lxE9xdjtuQyi8lUX545auxKX4kYbnW+WCqG6lNT0zPXiMdZG0h/p Yo2cWsFNV8Ek/zTjM7AeHqFUC2AHZLtv4f3uU=
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=cDZyd6dJj5yPJiHF6KG05hdGGqle0Fn++2ilOo0nEy8=; b=ZpZYevmPdunC+KS1CNBDH49+08BTEGzEFZLGLl8hzOy0V87GUYpGgLVjGNvR3Sp9ig U9hxyraYVJ3/x+D9En53YA8vzJeMdNTCTGKT2fZZ2ju/NOm5I5PUyb7e7v6XyJe38JKT 3h/jHOIxrl5ArgGaqB27wDCxL85fzNZj+3+qxxidMepxlMVu21ZWRZSKYRIny45kvJ2V J6PF/CIOU/jH8YxljaQ4dVe6xFuLshNGAnkcxGnFksavpOGQKDNU0tAwqmb6lK2C7viY dR4quG1I+mTmVK77umCI4FWPMG3Y6lIFX5h9PoYUM3ojGRuIMkdxZh7AQM1m68tktCxC snsg==
X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM532Ro3e+4dtROVyokezM9Fo9ToBfj1DsgmTa43CMCSu45y4ubTeT cuEAFPDbFG3rAO1Ado+Ep/fcojPAAaD9Ng==
X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJzqTdW4Z1Oss5k13voTjW9/HFe/DYxEiHItcyNMNpTp5OCLt+Je8YljSH54x1GKkl9JCJlvRw==
X-Received: by 2002:a05:620a:889:: with SMTP id b9mr28491914qka.229.1635842471123; Tue, 02 Nov 2021 01:41:11 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-yb1-f173.google.com (mail-yb1-f173.google.com. [209.85.219.173]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id j5sm3486330qki.39.2021.11.02.01.41.09 for <rtcweb@ietf.org> (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 bits=128/128); Tue, 02 Nov 2021 01:41:10 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-yb1-f173.google.com with SMTP id s186so27068173yba.12 for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Tue, 02 Nov 2021 01:41:09 -0700 (PDT)
X-Received: by 2002:a25:ca58:: with SMTP id a85mr40932045ybg.155.1635842469561; Tue, 02 Nov 2021 01:41:09 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <CA+9kkMA_8jCGeb_QkhVz2JLRYGbq+MkGG9wJ2k0vo6noDDkkQA@mail.gmail.com> <CAD5OKxvK_CUnHc0kqNNVUkOHgtUqL=vjdUTLqL+RJpZBtWL+4A@mail.gmail.com> <CALe60zAC7VA6y5oLkC9HBRQUhJyY73Atbfmm1KVKw=hyPqD=2Q@mail.gmail.com> <CAD5OKxvi7t6ug9xsjqiB35hTWNJ0D04XK5w=njZ8hB_6UpRzEQ@mail.gmail.com> <CAOLzse14Qkn+EiO3xHfGi2QmBvH0M=fQD-SmA9TXsfmHjPKLfQ@mail.gmail.com> <CAD5OKxtrBFsZBGUKtB6MNwMrPnzE9NSyQWrjXGjzE8PkYmj8Bw@mail.gmail.com> <CAOLzse2L=Xu=Y944B9mwURQ6VP__KuEp-C_-xNw0MhNLv2LoCw@mail.gmail.com> <CAD5OKxtr==_dwW7-JbjP7abxNAityukfpHS5xK6vf-YuTADd+A@mail.gmail.com> <CAOLzse1-8cTg=GE2ndQ3tpVa25wzNqkOy6J6M30X=dN2Ejnvyg@mail.gmail.com> <CAD5OKxs5wCQuaaC1sL+Zi2iwMhnzexTh89HVOWc2jLTBGoyD9A@mail.gmail.com> <HE1PR07MB44413791A6AC8D20349BEBF793889@HE1PR07MB4441.eurprd07.prod.outlook.com> <CAD5OKxtyCUgJP2CjPkyNBuDp3_N-42J15AvB==36edujJsjh-g@mail.gmail.com> <HE1PR07MB4441051506F5A2E16A2C902993899@HE1PR07MB4441.eurprd07.prod.outlook.com> <CAOLzse1H6OgtpkbMNXVSJFpvWoBoJeVp3Rg37x7d24LZ7A+Pmw@mail.gmail.com> <HE1PR07MB4441B47E50789CBBE1BCB3F5938A9@HE1PR07MB4441.eurprd07.prod.outlook.com> <CAOLzse1ARs0e6ePtKZnVMwjzaYb-+h1Fg-E307wiAPSqjDwcnw@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAOLzse1ARs0e6ePtKZnVMwjzaYb-+h1Fg-E307wiAPSqjDwcnw@mail.gmail.com>
From: Roman Shpount <roman@telurix.com>
Date: Tue, 02 Nov 2021 04:40:56 -0400
X-Gmail-Original-Message-ID: <CAD5OKxs9BxVTyu2qZf4UnyifGiJiRo-GNrjdZvrCyUvPy0wp0Q@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CAD5OKxs9BxVTyu2qZf4UnyifGiJiRo-GNrjdZvrCyUvPy0wp0Q@mail.gmail.com>
To: Justin Uberti <juberti@alphaexplorationco.com>
Cc: Christer Holmberg <christer.holmberg@ericsson.com>, Justin Uberti <justin@uberti.name>, RTCWeb IETF <rtcweb@ietf.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="0000000000004e925c05cfca4161"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/rtcweb/9o37gRQ602umBq-kQv_Dgp632KY>
Subject: Re: [rtcweb] Working Group Last Call for draft-uberti-rtcweb-rfc8829bis-01.txt
X-BeenThere: rtcweb@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
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: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/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, 02 Nov 2021 08:41:18 -0000

On Mon, Nov 1, 2021 at 2:52 PM Justin Uberti <juberti@alphaexplorationco.com>
wrote:

> The PROBLEM is that we have two endpoints, where one sends a subsequent
>> offer, and the other one expects an initial offer. What do you normally do
>> when you have that kind of problem? You use an SBC/B2BUA. In this case that
>> SBC/B2BUA would be the 3PCC controller.
>>
>> So, my suggestion would be to remove the SHOULD text from 8843bis, and
>> simply add a note somewhere (in 8843bis and/or 8829bis) which describes the
>> issue and says that the 3GPP controller needs to modify the offer
>> accordingly.
>>
>> Roman, thoughts on this? If the 3PCC is going to rewrite the offer SDP
> anyway then maybe adding a=bundle-only isn't the end of the world.
>

I am not opposed to this idea. 3PCC typically knows that the subsequent
offer is going to be used as initial, and should be able to rewrite the
offer to make it valid. We can change SIP Considerations section in 8843bis
(
https://www.ietf.org/archive/id/draft-ietf-mmusic-rfc8843bis-05.html#name-sip-consideration)
remove the SHOULD, and specify that 3PCC controller should fix the offer.
We can then reference this note from 8829bis or restate the same guidance.
_____________
Roman Shpount

v2.39.1 | Report a Bug | By Email | System Status