IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [rtcweb] Proposal for dealing with CNAMEs and MSIDs for synchronization

Stefan Hakansson LK <stefan.lk.hakansson@ericsson.com> Thu, 07 February 2013 19:59 UTC

Return-Path: <stefan.lk.hakansson@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 664CA21F88EA for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 7 Feb 2013 11:59:42 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -6.085
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.085 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.164, BAYES_00=-2.599, HELO_EQ_SE=0.35, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id mYmdz12Q2HvY for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 7 Feb 2013 11:59:41 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mailgw7.ericsson.se (mailgw7.ericsson.se [193.180.251.48]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6C55521F87EE for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Thu, 7 Feb 2013 11:59:41 -0800 (PST)
X-AuditID: c1b4fb30-b7f0d6d000007e61-6d-511407ac0e19
Received: from esessmw0184.eemea.ericsson.se (Unknown_Domain [153.88.253.124]) by mailgw7.ericsson.se (Symantec Mail Security) with SMTP id 1B.AB.32353.CA704115; Thu, 7 Feb 2013 20:59:40 +0100 (CET)
Received: from [127.0.0.1] (153.88.115.8) by esessmw0184.eemea.ericsson.se (153.88.115.82) with Microsoft SMTP Server id 8.3.279.1; Thu, 7 Feb 2013 20:59:40 +0100
Message-ID: <511407AA.1040501@ericsson.com>
Date: Thu, 07 Feb 2013 20:59:38 +0100
From: Stefan Hakansson LK <stefan.lk.hakansson@ericsson.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:17.0) Gecko/20130106 Thunderbird/17.0.2
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Eric Rescorla <ekr@rtfm.com>
References: <CABcZeBO105HXWoRAbaAR0fGTCLtDmAyjt-DOM=aKy80sg2SG_Q@mail.gmail.com> <51140038.3040001@ericsson.com> <CABcZeBP_-ce-JT-oDkpkDoRKjrZo+m7NLTcifCOsRBM_qKPTmg@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CABcZeBP_-ce-JT-oDkpkDoRKjrZo+m7NLTcifCOsRBM_qKPTmg@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Brightmail-Tracker: H4sIAAAAAAAAA+NgFmpjluLIzCtJLcpLzFFi42KZGfG3RncNu0igwc/JMhYrXp9jt1j7r53d gcljyZKfTB6TH7cxBzBFcdmkpOZklqUW6dslcGW03r7DVDCVp+LM0rXsDYxfOboYOTkkBEwk Lr3rZoawxSQu3FvP1sXIxSEkcJJR4sDSY8wQzjJGiStHfrGCVPEKaEt8OTWdHcRmEVCR+PT7 MBOIzSZgI7G2ewqYLSoQJtH7+hwjRL2gxMmZT1hAbBEBBYlff06A2cwCwhIbLraB2cICIRLT ep9BLdvKKNG54BnYIE6BQIlHc88yQzTYSlyYcx2qWV5i+9s5YHEhAV2Jd6/vsU5gFJyFZN8s JC2zkLQsYGRexciem5iZk15uvokRGJYHt/w22MG46b7YIUZpDhYlcd5w1wsBQgLpiSWp2amp BalF8UWlOanFhxiZODilGhjlZ72tNXQwt5/G9sRQxfTAl1ophyMe+eVzdDef6Aq8NHcqs1MK x8s96xSSRZ22nvTlEnAyLxE2qdsn+sRa4dcUnfZr/ll3z0WGGXltWnrkcO6vyjW/VwbW+9d/ NP4vNWM2K9O+cJbvP3e8tbV4O7HLY9XbVUKMqnPU7FVudTwIqXt1X3P/ZCklluKMREMt5qLi RABUKHOrGQIAAA==
Cc: rtcweb@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [rtcweb] Proposal for dealing with CNAMEs and MSIDs for synchronization
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: Thu, 07 Feb 2013 19:59:42 -0000

On 02/07/2013 08:43 PM, Eric Rescorla wrote:
>
>

>
>     My question is basically: what if the sender creates two
>     MediaStreams for which all tracks have local sources (cam's,
>     mike's), sends them to a peer, will the RTP streams for both
>     MediaStreams have the same or different CNAME?
>
>     I argued for that they should have the same.
>
>
> Yes, I think this is a separate (and fraught) question. :)

Separate question, but I think the answer should be documented 
(regardless on if it is "same", "different" or "implementers choice").

>
> -Ekr
>
>
>         4. There are two ways for MSID and CNAME to be inconsistent.
>         - If MSID indicates synchronization but different CNAMEs are
>         provided,
>             synchronization is not attempted.
>         - If MSID indicates no synchronization but the same CNAME is used,
>             then the tracks shall be synchronized, even though they
>         appear in
>             different MediaStreams.
>
>         -Ekr
>
>
>
>         _________________________________________________
>         rtcweb mailing list
>         rtcweb@ietf.org <mailto:rtcweb@ietf.org>
>         https://www.ietf.org/mailman/__listinfo/rtcweb
>         <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rtcweb>
>
>
>     _________________________________________________
>     rtcweb mailing list
>     rtcweb@ietf.org <mailto:rtcweb@ietf.org>
>     https://www.ietf.org/mailman/__listinfo/rtcweb
>     <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rtcweb>
>
>

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email