Re: [rtcweb] draft-roach-mmusic-unified-plan-00 expired

[Magnus Westerlund <[e-mail]>]

Iñaki,
(As WG Chair)

I don't see these posting as productive for the WG. We have a consensus
on using SDP and Offer/Answer. This WG can't change the Offer/Answer
process. That is done in MMUSIC.

So please stop wasting peoples time with proposals that doesn't fit the
limits established by consensus decisions.

Regards

Magnus


On 2014-01-23 10:31, Iñaki Baz Castillo wrote:
> 2014/1/22 Paul Kyzivat <[e-mail]>:
>> Iñaki,
>>
>> I've read what you read below, but I cannot figure out what you want the O/A
>> to contain, and what you want it to mean.
> 
> Hi Paul,
> 
> My proposal is basically that the SDP offer send by Peer-A contains N
> m lines (meaning N tracks) which are just about sending RTP from
> Peer-A to Peer-B.
> The SDP answer contains M m lines (N can be different than M), which
> are just about sending RTP from Peer-B to Peer-A.
> 
> Of course this breaks the SDP negotiation model, specially the step in
> which codecs are negotiated. That should be done in some other way
> which does not rely in mathing m lines.
> 
> Yes, this is too complex and would end in something totally different
> to what SDP is, so please let's forget this subject and sorry for the
> noise.
> 
> P.S. Said that I don't like Unified Plan at all since it relies on 1 m
> line = 1 media track, and makes negotiation with a conference server
> really complex (explained in my mails above).
> 
> Best regards.
> 
> 
> 


-- 

Magnus Westerlund

----------------------------------------------------------------------
Services, Media and Network features, Ericsson Research EAB/TXM
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Ericsson AB                 | Phone  [phone]
Färögatan 6                 | Mobile [phone]
SE-164 80 Stockholm, Sweden | mailto: [e-mail]
----------------------------------------------------------------------