[rtcweb] #23: Section 4.4 SDP signaling requirement
"rtcweb issue tracker" <trac+rtcweb@trac.tools.ietf.org> Sun, 25 August 2013 22:30 UTC
Return-Path: <trac+rtcweb@trac.tools.ietf.org>
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 B9E5D11E80FB for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 25 Aug 2013 15:30:04 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -102.599
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
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 iEZWM4VVlA5E for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 25 Aug 2013 15:30:04 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from grenache.tools.ietf.org (grenache.tools.ietf.org [IPv6:2a01:3f0:1:2::30]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0B99411E80D2 for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Sun, 25 Aug 2013 15:30:04 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:60241 helo=grenache.tools.ietf.org ident=www-data) by grenache.tools.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from <trac+rtcweb@trac.tools.ietf.org>) id 1VDior-0007eo-Qr; Mon, 26 Aug 2013 00:30:01 +0200
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
From: rtcweb issue tracker <trac+rtcweb@trac.tools.ietf.org>
X-Trac-Version: 0.12.3
Precedence: bulk
Auto-Submitted: auto-generated
X-Mailer: Trac 0.12.3, by Edgewall Software
To: draft-ietf-rtcweb-rtp-usage@tools.ietf.org, bernard_aboba@hotmail.com
X-Trac-Project: rtcweb
Date: Sun, 25 Aug 2013 22:30:01 -0000
X-URL: http://tools.ietf.org/rtcweb/
X-Trac-Ticket-URL: http://trac.tools.ietf.org/wg/rtcweb/trac/ticket/23
Message-ID: <066.e25c55f4beabdbb9b445f98350fa83ad@trac.tools.ietf.org>
X-Trac-Ticket-ID: 23
X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: 127.0.0.1
X-SA-Exim-Rcpt-To: draft-ietf-rtcweb-rtp-usage@tools.ietf.org, bernard_aboba@hotmail.com, rtcweb@ietf.org
X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: trac+rtcweb@trac.tools.ietf.org
X-SA-Exim-Scanned: No (on grenache.tools.ietf.org); SAEximRunCond expanded to false
Resent-To: csp@csperkins.org, jorg.ott@aalto.fi, magnus.westerlund@ericsson.com
Resent-Message-Id: <20130825223004.0B99411E80D2@ietfa.amsl.com>
Resent-Date: Sun, 25 Aug 2013 15:30:04 -0700
Resent-From: trac+rtcweb@trac.tools.ietf.org
Cc: rtcweb@ietf.org
Subject: [rtcweb] #23: Section 4.4 SDP signaling requirement
X-BeenThere: rtcweb@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
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: Sun, 25 Aug 2013 22:30:04 -0000
#23: Section 4.4 SDP signaling requirement If such RTP session set-up is to be used, this MUST be negotiated during the signalling phase [I-D.ietf-mmusic-sdp-bundle-negotiation]. [BA] What about WebRTC applications that don't use SDP for signaling? Or applications that decide to multiplex Audio and Video because they know that the peer supports it? Mandating the use of BUNDLE negotiation on the wire doesn't make sense. -- -------------------------------------+------------------------------------- Reporter: | Owner: draft-ietf-rtcweb-rtp- bernard_aboba@hotmail.com | usage@tools.ietf.org Type: defect | Status: new Priority: critical | Milestone: milestone1 Component: rtp-usage | Version: 1.0 Severity: Active WG Document | Keywords: -------------------------------------+------------------------------------- Ticket URL: <http://trac.tools.ietf.org/wg/rtcweb/trac/ticket/23> rtcweb <http://tools.ietf.org/rtcweb/>
- [rtcweb] #23: Section 4.4 SDP signaling requireme… rtcweb issue tracker
- Re: [rtcweb] #23: Section 4.4 SDP signaling requi… Magnus Westerlund
- Re: [rtcweb] #23: Section 4.4 SDP signaling requi… rtcweb issue tracker
- Re: [rtcweb] #23: Section 4.4 SDP signaling requi… Harald Alvestrand
- Re: [rtcweb] #23: Section 4.4 SDP signaling requi… Colin Perkins
- Re: [rtcweb] #23: Section 4.4 SDP signaling requi… Bernard Aboba
- Re: [rtcweb] #23: Section 4.4 SDP signaling requi… rtcweb issue tracker
- Re: [rtcweb] #23: Section 4.4 SDP signaling requi… cowwoc
- Re: [rtcweb] #23: Section 4.4 SDP signaling requi… Bernard Aboba
- Re: [rtcweb] #23: Section 4.4 SDP signaling requi… cowwoc