IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [rtcweb] SDP Offer/Answer draft-jennings-rtcweb-signaling - More-coming and final answer (Section 5.2.3)

Christer Holmberg <christer.holmberg@ericsson.com> Wed, 19 October 2011 13:06 UTC

Return-Path: <christer.holmberg@ericsson.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 D585121F8B9D for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 19 Oct 2011 06:06:24 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -6.549
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.549 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.050, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4]
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 7blQxaCEaTbp for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 19 Oct 2011 06:06:24 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mailgw10.se.ericsson.net (mailgw10.se.ericsson.net [193.180.251.61]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0CDC721F8B22 for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Wed, 19 Oct 2011 06:06:23 -0700 (PDT)
X-AuditID: c1b4fb3d-b7c26ae0000035b9-07-4e9ecb4e1f5f
Received: from esessmw0247.eemea.ericsson.se (Unknown_Domain [153.88.253.125]) by mailgw10.se.ericsson.net (Symantec Mail Security) with SMTP id 92.FB.13753.E4BCE9E4; Wed, 19 Oct 2011 15:06:23 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from ESESSCMS0356.eemea.ericsson.se ([169.254.1.250]) by esessmw0247.eemea.ericsson.se ([10.2.3.116]) with mapi; Wed, 19 Oct 2011 15:06:22 +0200
From: Christer Holmberg <christer.holmberg@ericsson.com>
To: Cullen Jennings <fluffy@cisco.com>, "rtcweb@ietf.org" <rtcweb@ietf.org>
Date: Wed, 19 Oct 2011 15:06:20 +0200
Thread-Topic: [rtcweb] SDP Offer/Answer draft-jennings-rtcweb-signaling - More-coming and final answer (Section 5.2.3)
Thread-Index: AcyK59ZYlpyUDRxNTFOtHnNrwuQvpADdhRdw
Message-ID: <7F2072F1E0DE894DA4B517B93C6A058522341F4AB9@ESESSCMS0356.eemea.ericsson.se>
References: <15B0E3AD-3086-499A-8E79-7AE58B3376C4@cisco.com>
In-Reply-To: <15B0E3AD-3086-499A-8E79-7AE58B3376C4@cisco.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
acceptlanguage: en-US
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Brightmail-Tracker: AAAAAA==
Cc: Jonathan Rosenberg <jonathan.rosenberg@skype.net>
Subject: Re: [rtcweb] SDP Offer/Answer draft-jennings-rtcweb-signaling - More-coming and final answer (Section 5.2.3)
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: Wed, 19 Oct 2011 13:06:24 -0000

 
Hi,

A couple of questions regarding the usage of the more-coming flag:

Q1. If one sends an ANSWER with the more-coming flag set to 'true', is it allowed to later send *additional* ANSWER(s) with the flag set to 'true' (before sending the final ANSWER)?

Q2. Are there restrictions when it comes to changing information in a non-final answer and a final answer? Or, can the final answer be completely different from previously sent non-final ANSWERS? In "legacy" O/A there are restrictions.

Q3. Must the answerer wait for OK for a non-final ANSWER before sending a new ANSWER (non-final or final)?

Q4. If the answer to Q3 is "no", how does the answerer know to which ANSWER an OK message applies? AFAIK, the seq/sessionId values are identical for all ANSWERs associated with a specific OFFER.

Q5. The text says, that while the OFFER is "open", ie a final ANSWER has not been sent, the answerer is not allowed to send an OFFER. I assume that also applies to the offerer, ie it is not allowed to send a new OFFER until it has received a final ANSWER - even if it has received one or more non-final ANSWERs. Maybe it's obvious, but I think it would be good to explictily add some text about that (if my assumption is correct, that is :).

Regards,

Christer






> -----Original Message-----
> From: rtcweb-bounces@ietf.org 
> [mailto:rtcweb-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Cullen Jennings
> Sent: 15. lokakuuta 2011 6:09
> To: rtcweb@ietf.org; public-webrtc@w3.org
> Cc: Jonathan Rosenberg
> Subject: [rtcweb] SDP Offer/Answer draft-jennings-rtcweb-signaling
> 
> 
> Jonathan and I submitted a new draft on setting up media 
> based on the SDP Offer/Answer model. The ASCII flows are a 
> bit hard to read so until I update them, I recommend reading 
> the PDF version at 
> 
> http://tools.ietf.org/pdf/draft-jennings-rtcweb-signaling-00.pdf
> 
> Clearly the draft is an early stage but we plan to revise it 
> before the deadline for the IETF 82. Love to get input - 
> particularly on if this looks like generally the right 
> direction to go. 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> rtcweb mailing list
> rtcweb@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rtcweb
>

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email