Subject: Re: [AVT] Audio Payload format design

From: Colin Perkins <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 03 May 2002 15:48:34 +0100

--> Orion Hodson writes:
>/-- Magnus Westerlund wrote:
...
>| I would suggest that you collect the ideas about having a generic 
>| interleaving format into a draft. I guess that document should also give 
>| suggestions and motivations behind why you should design in the way you 
>| argue. Then we can have a discussion about in the WG if it is an 
>| appropriate way. My comments to your suggestion about self describing 
>| frames is that it may still require a format specific payload header, 
>| for example to handle something like the codec mode request field in 
>| AMR. Then we can also see how applicable the ideas is for any future 
>| format to be standardized.
>
>This is a perfectly reasonable suggestion.  I have an old interleaving draft 
>that would be improved with the codec/payload request feature of EVRC/SMV's 
>interleaver.

I think it's too late to change EVRC now, but I encourage you to submit the
generic interleaving draft anyway. We've been missing a non-format specific
interleaver, resulting in the need to define them in several payload format
drafts.

Colin

_______________________________________________
Audio/Video Transport Working Group
[email-masked]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/avt