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

[Christer Holmberg <[e-mail]>]

Hi Cullen,

My question is how it would be done when creating the new PC, so I don't think replacing UPDATE with REPLACE would solve the problem :)

Also, the usage of a new PC can also be used for serial forking. But, that is not the issue.

Regards,

Christer

Sent from my Sony Ericsson Xperia arc S

"Cullen Jennings (fluffy)" <[e-mail]> wrote:


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 <[e-mail]> 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: [e-mail] [mailto:[e-mail]] On Behalf Of Christer Holmberg
> Sent: 30. syyskuuta 2013 11:08
> To: [e-mail]
> 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
>