IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [rtcweb] JSEP: Order of m- lines in multiple PeerConnections

"Cullen Jennings (fluffy)" <fluffy@cisco.com> Fri, 18 October 2013 01:06 UTC

Return-Path: <fluffy@cisco.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 B7DB311E82F2 for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 17 Oct 2013 18:06:10 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -110.599
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-110.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-8, 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 4Ca7yS6xnT2i for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 17 Oct 2013 18:06:05 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from rcdn-iport-5.cisco.com (rcdn-iport-5.cisco.com [173.37.86.76]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 217CF11E82E7 for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Thu, 17 Oct 2013 18:06:05 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=@cisco.com; l=1759; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1382058365; x=1383267965; h=from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:references: in-reply-to:content-id:content-transfer-encoding: mime-version; bh=YcNrq4SSyXjT0ELUJX/xH7IYfmKxpBsexXhp60A4k6Q=; b=Z0RZ6/aZBfRpUxEXlbK9wa+bSYKdpnGz7ogQN7CJKe26ibt/uMAj1xh/ uC8E0wj3OvzIW+DHymYDHrpr9SvdRLYNDRQysGLWY6fixyOKTkuj2EE/6 Fd3BCUM9pf8dLqLy84Im2XkgzCKXFhaU4yyVO59kGIpzTSmmc5RRzT6Cz Q=;
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: AgoFAPyIYFKtJXG9/2dsb2JhbABagweBCr4NgSsWdIIlAQEBAwF5BQsCAQgRBAEBCx0HMhQJCAEBBA4FCId4BsB3jhiBBgIxB4MfgQcDlCeOLoc1gySBcDk
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.93,518,1378857600"; d="scan'208";a="273558344"
Received: from rcdn-core2-2.cisco.com ([173.37.113.189]) by rcdn-iport-5.cisco.com with ESMTP; 18 Oct 2013 01:06:04 +0000
Received: from xhc-aln-x07.cisco.com (xhc-aln-x07.cisco.com [173.36.12.81]) by rcdn-core2-2.cisco.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id r9I1644d025242 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=FAIL); Fri, 18 Oct 2013 01:06:04 GMT
Received: from xmb-aln-x02.cisco.com ([169.254.5.143]) by xhc-aln-x07.cisco.com ([173.36.12.81]) with mapi id 14.02.0318.004; Thu, 17 Oct 2013 20:06:04 -0500
From: "Cullen Jennings (fluffy)" <fluffy@cisco.com>
To: Christer Holmberg <christer.holmberg@ericsson.com>
Thread-Topic: JSEP: Order of m- lines in multiple PeerConnections
Thread-Index: Ac69tBInSk4xBHAwQSOQDX27ZZb6/AMtSyPQAFcb2IA=
Date: Fri, 18 Oct 2013 01:06:02 +0000
Message-ID: <C5E08FE080ACFD4DAE31E4BDBF944EB123CB8C15@xmb-aln-x02.cisco.com>
References: <7594FB04B1934943A5C02806D1A2204B1C4AFB57@ESESSMB209.ericsson.se> <7594FB04B1934943A5C02806D1A2204B1C4C0339@ESESSMB209.ericsson.se>
In-Reply-To: <7594FB04B1934943A5C02806D1A2204B1C4C0339@ESESSMB209.ericsson.se>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-originating-ip: [10.21.71.129]
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="Windows-1252"
Content-ID: <64B52131F7EF5540A9FC30209F8A6867@emea.cisco.com>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
Cc: "rtcweb@ietf.org" <rtcweb@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [rtcweb] JSEP: Order of m- lines in multiple PeerConnections
X-BeenThere: rtcweb@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
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: <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: Fri, 18 Oct 2013 01:06:10 -0000

Perhaps in the parallel forking section, we should replace UPDATE with "INVITE with replaces" . Would that work ?

Alternatively we could just remove the parallel forking section. 

On Oct 16, 2013, at 5:16 AM, Christer Holmberg <christer.holmberg@ericsson.com> wrote:

> Hi,
>  
> Any comments on this issue? I’d like to have some e-mail discussions before Vancouver.
>  
> I’d also like it to be listed as an issue – unless, of course, I have missed something, and it really isn’t an issue :)
>  
> Regards,
>  
> Christer
>  
> From: rtcweb-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:rtcweb-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Christer Holmberg
> Sent: 30. syyskuuta 2013 11:08
> To: rtcweb@ietf.org
> Subject: [rtcweb] JSEP: Order of m- lines in multiple PeerConnections
>  
> Hi,
>  
> JSEP talks about the usage of multiple PeerConnection to support forking, i.e. for each new forked leg (SIP: early dialog) a new PeerConnection is created.
>  
> As has been indicated, as each new PeerConnection will have its own set of address properties, ICE properties etc, so a new Offer will have to be created and sent to inform the remote about the new properties.
>  
> So far so I good.
>  
> I also assume that the same camera/mic/etc sources are connection to each PeerConnection, so the number of m- lines in the Offer of the new PeerConnection should be the same.
>  
> However, according the 3264, the ORDER of the m- lines also need to be kept the same.
>  
> So, my question is: how can I ensure that the order of the m- lines in an Offer for a new PeerConnection is the same as in an Offer for an old PeerConnection?
>  
> Regards,
>  
> Christer
>

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email