Re: [rtcweb] Agenda requests for Atlanta meeting

Christer Holmberg <> Thu, 11 October 2012 15:42 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4BA0721F8734 for <>; Thu, 11 Oct 2012 08:42:14 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -6.126
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.126 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.123, BAYES_00=-2.599, HELO_EQ_SE=0.35, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4]
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 2d38N4QrCWVH for <>; Thu, 11 Oct 2012 08:42:13 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5FCDD21F871D for <>; Thu, 11 Oct 2012 08:42:13 -0700 (PDT)
X-AuditID: c1b4fb25-b7f956d0000011c3-c6-5076e8d4d725
Received: from (Unknown_Domain []) by (Symantec Mail Security) with SMTP id 9C.CC.04547.4D8E6705; Thu, 11 Oct 2012 17:42:12 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from ([]) by ([]) with mapi; Thu, 11 Oct 2012 17:42:11 +0200
From: Christer Holmberg <>
To: Harald Alvestrand <>, "" <>
Date: Thu, 11 Oct 2012 17:38:18 +0200
Thread-Topic: [rtcweb] Agenda requests for Atlanta meeting
Thread-Index: Ac2nxFkYlxHAcOGpQSSR4wekASssMwAAhcYH
Message-ID: <>
References: <> <> <> <> <> <>, <>
In-Reply-To: <>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
acceptlanguage: en-US
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Brightmail-Tracker: H4sIAAAAAAAAA+NgFjrNLMWRmVeSWpSXmKPExsUyM+Jvre6VF2UBBvM/ilkc6+tis1j7r53d gcnjyoQrrB5LlvxkCmCK4rJJSc3JLEst0rdL4MroOPeWreAHR8XPe6tYGhgb2LsYOTgkBEwk lh+36WLkBDLFJC7cW8/WxcjFISRwilGi98hEZghnIaPEq88rwBrYBCwkuv9pgzSICARL9D5/ zwhiswioSuzfeosJxBYWsJRYtHk/G0SNlcSaW9eZIWwjiWe77oPZvALhEgt7u9lBbCGBjcwS bQsVQGxOAV2J1yfes4LYjEAHfT+1Bmwms4C4xK0n85kgDhWQWLLnPDOELSrx8vE/qHpRiTvt 6xkh6nUkFuz+xAZha0ssW/gaaq+gxMmZT1gmMIrOQjJ2FpKWWUhaZiFpWcDIsopRODcxMye9 3EgvtSgzubg4P0+vOHUTIzBCDm75rbqD8c45kUOM0hwsSuK81lv3+AsJpCeWpGanphakFsUX leakFh9iZOLglGpgbBHRXXFGbGVLVUiiLveHR4cXOme9f3W0/2vUhM4Lk14cPNLQtCKjd+nR OD/Dd0sdxOe7bWnfOyfmn0jK0vkth6ZmMs8uj88wuLBm273PfZLLpGLVHPSlCytmGrybwb/6 5tpZWq6c2htsrq4wjPRg2vhVLVP1qBPLlOaVGulc247ZbUh935DzQ4mlOCPRUIu5qDgRACQk 5LpeAgAA
Subject: Re: [rtcweb] Agenda requests for Atlanta meeting
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: Real-Time Communication in WEB-browsers working group list <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 11 Oct 2012 15:42:14 -0000


>>> I have no problem with that. But, again, we do need to get the JSEP O/A sorted out. My suggesting is still that the base should be RFC 3264, and if we need to "relax" things we should very carefully look at those cases.
>> I have not seen any reason to relax 3264 yet but if something comes up, agree we should carefully look at the cases. I think we can just do straight up 3264. Arguments that SIP early media in a 180 is not compliant with 3264 are just wrong.
> This seems to be true as long as I consider the offer/180 exchange a
> separate SDP exchange from the offer/answer exchange, and abandon the
> concept that the final answer "updates" the 180 answer.
> Is that what you are saying, or did I squint the wrong way?

If you receive the SDP answer in a reliable 180 response, that IS an offer/answer exchange :)

That answer CANNOT be "updated" in another reliable 18x response, or in the 200 response. 

(You can receive a "copy" of the previously received SDP answer in the 18x/200 responses, but it will not update the previously received SDP answer)