Re: [rtcweb] JSEP issue regarding TRANSPORT/IDENTICAL mux category attributes

[Justin Uberti <[e-mail]>]

I think it makes sense for JSEP to reference appropriate text in
bundle-negotiation.

However, I didn't see the specific contradiction that you indicated in your
initial email. Can you explain more?

On Fri, Apr 7, 2017 at 11:05 AM, Christer Holmberg <
[e-mail]> wrote:

> Hi,
>
>
>
> >The suggestion to change "specifies that attributes... should not be
> repeated" to "specifies when attributes ... MUST not be repeated" sounds
>
> >good to me. The actual "when" is described in more detail in the
> following paragraphs.
>
>
>
> I don’t think we should describe the “when” in JSEP – at least not using
> RFC 2119 terminology. We should reference the “Mux considerations” section
> in BUNDLE. I have created a BUNDLE PR that (among other things) clarifies
> the “when” within that section.
>
>
>
> https://github.com/cdh4u/draft-sdp-bundle/pull/33/commits/
> 9d3d02d04ca036e2b128d760b61c73e5dd1a0a48
>
>
>
> JSEP also contains the following statement (and a number of similar
> statements):
>
>
>
>    “The following attributes, which are of category IDENTICAL or
>
>    TRANSPORT, MUST appear only in "m=" sections which either have a
>
>    unique address or which are associated with the bundle-tag.”
>
>
>
> While correct, I again think we should either reference to BUNDLE for the
> “when”, OR say something like “According to BUNDLE, the following
> attributes, which…”.
>
>
>
> That way, if something for whatever reason changes in BUNDLE, JSEP will
> automatically be aligned.
>
>
>
> Regards,
>
>
>
> Christer
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On Fri, Apr 7, 2017 at 2:09 AM, Christer Holmberg <
> [e-mail]> wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
>
>
> I have found an issue in JSEP.
>
>
>
> Section 5.2.1 says:
>
>
>
>    "Each m= section, provided it is not marked as bundle-only, MUST
>
>    generate a unique set of ICE credentials and gather its own unique
>
>    set of ICE candidates.  Bundle-only m= sections MUST NOT contain any
>
>    ICE credentials and MUST NOT gather any candidates.”
>
> …and:
>
>    "[I-D.ietf-mmusic-sdp-mux-attributes] groups SDP attributes into
>
>    different categories.  To avoid unnecessary duplication when
>
>    bundling, Section 8.1 of [I-D.ietf-mmusic-sdp-bundle-negotiation]
>
>    specifies that attributes of category IDENTICAL or TRANSPORT should
>
>    not be repeated in bundled m= sections."
>
>
>
>
>
> First, the two paragraphs contradict each other, because the ICE
> credentials (SDP ‘ice-ufrag’, ice-pwd’ etc attributes) are of TRANSPORT
> category.
>
>
>
> Second, according to BUNDLE, IDENTICAL/TRANSPORT category attributes are
> not duplicated if the m- section 1) contains a shared address (BUNDLE
> address) or 2) is bundle-only.
>
> If the m- line contains a unique address, which is common in the initial
> offer, attributes need to be associated with each m- line. However, the
> text does not address that.
>
>
>
> I think the easiest way to fix it is by simply s/“specifies that
> attributes”/ “specifies WHEN attributes”.
>
>
>
> …and change “should not” to “must not”.
>
>
>
> Regards,
>
>
>
> Christer
>
>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> rtcweb mailing list
> [e-mail]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rtcweb
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> rtcweb mailing list
> [e-mail]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rtcweb
>
>