Re: [rtcweb] Plan A, respun

[Harald Alvestrand <[e-mail]>]

On 05/12/2013 11:39 AM, Emil Ivov wrote:
> Coming back to this for a sec:
>
> On 08.05.13, 14:00, Harald Alvestrand wrote:
>> To put a blunt point on it: Either send less than ~32 streams, or give
>> a=ssrc attributes.
> Wouldn't it make more sense to either send ~32 streams or you don't use
> bundle? If you run out of PTs for a single m-line then you may also
> reconsider use of rtcp-mux.
So you're saying that when using 1-31 streams, we use a single port 
pair, but when we use 32 streams, we use 32 port pairs?

I hadn't even considered the possibility of driving off that particular 
cliff at that boundary.
>
> It seems to me that the consequences of not using bundle in some
> specific scenarios, especially in cases where trickle ICE is also
> supported, are far lesser than requiring everyone to support
> pre-announcement of SSRCs.

Why?

Remember: In Plan B, the only applications who have to support 
pre-announcement of SSRCs are those that want to send more than one 
media stream in a single RTP session.

Any application that is satisfied with having mulitple RTP sessions 
corresponding to multiple M-lines can just signal as they're used to, 
without BUNDLE or SSRC signalling (although it will work a lot better if 
they use a=content consistently).

Plan B is even compatible with folks that want to use BUNDLE, but are 
happy to let the recipient handle incoming SSRCs without knowing which 
one is  which.

That's not "everyone".

>
> Emil
>
>