Re: [rtcweb] Stream control: [MMUSIC] msid-04 submitted

[Harald Alvestrand <[e-mail]>]

On 02/19/2014 09:19 AM, Christer Holmberg wrote:
> Hi,
>
> If the indication is “permanent”, rather than using a new msid-control
> attribute, could it be indicated by NOT including some information in
> the Answer?

Certainly, but then you have to include some information in the answer
when the indication is not permanent.

Which information were you thinking of utilizing as a signal?


>
> Regards,
>
> Christer
>
> Sent from Windows Mail
>
> *From:* 'Harald Alvestrand' <mailto:[e-mail]>
> *Sent:* ‎Wednesday‎, ‎February‎ ‎19‎, ‎2014 ‎1‎:‎35‎ ‎AM
> *To:* Hans-Christer Holmberg <mailto:[e-mail]>,
> [e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]>
>
> One thing I did not add in my previous reply:
>
> If an offerer sets the direction of an m-line to sendrecv, and the
> answerer sets the direction to sendonly, the offerer will have no
> indication of whether the answerer intended the suspension of traffic to
> be temporary (msid-control: disable) or permanent (msid-control: reject
> or msid-control: stop).
>
> That was actually the main concern that drove the desire for a new
> mechanism.
> Once the new mechanism was in place, it seemed logical to be explicit
> about the other possible actions too, rather than relying on the
> sendrecv/sendonly/recvonly parameter.
>
>           Harald
>


-- 
Surveillance is pervasive. Go Dark.