Subject: RE: [MMUSIC] Question about the use of 0.0.0.0 and 0:0:0:0:0:0:0:0 in RFC 3264 (Offer/Answer)

From: "Barany, Pete" <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 20 May 2004 09:17:07 -0700

I am more interested in using 0:0:0:0:0:0:0:0 for offer/answer (not
'hold'). Regarding your comment about using 0.0.0.0 (even if you will
choose IPv6 later), the 'answerer' party might assume that the offerer
wants IPv4 and will therefore answer with an IN IP4 <connection-address>
in the 'c=' line? So I don't trust that idea all that much ...

Was there a technical reason that 0:0:0:0:0:0:0:0 was not accounted for
(for either 'hold' or 'offer/answer')? Thnx.

- Pete

-----Original Message-----
From: Paul Kyzivat [mailto:[email-masked]] 
Sent: Thursday, May 20, 2004 9:07 AM
To: Barany, Pete
Cc: [email-masked]
Subject: Re: [MMUSIC] Question about the use of 0.0.0.0 and
0:0:0:0:0:0:0:0 in RFC 3264 (Offer/Answer)

Barany, Pete wrote:
> 
> Question:
> The statement "An agent MUST be capable of receiving SDP with a
> Connection address of 0.0.0.0, in which case it means that neither
> RTP nor RTCP should be sent to the peer."
> 
> Does this apply also to IPv6 (0:0:0:0:0:0:0:0, or in abbreviated
> format ::)? There is some mention about putting a call on hold early
> in the paragraph above and how this doesn't work for IPv6 ...
> therefore, this is the cause of my confusion. Thnx.

It never said that, so I don't suppose you can assume it, even though I 
would expect most implementors would consider it a no-brainer to do
this.

OTOH, if you want to use this mechanism for hold, why not just use the 
IPv4 form? Even if you otherwise would use an IPv6 address, this doesn't

have to.

	Paul

_______________________________________________
mmusic mailing list
[email-masked]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mmusic

---

From: Jonathan Rosenberg <[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, 23 May 2004 19:38:21 -0400

Barany, Pete wrote:

> 'hold'). 

What is it you want to accomplish?

The problem is that we were using an IP address to try and imply a 
property (don't send anything). Its a much better idea to explicitly 
indicate the desired property (don't send anything), which is what the 
a=inactive does.

Thus, using IPv6 0:0:0:0:0:0:0:0 further propagates the usage of what 
turned out to be a bad design choice.

-Jonathan R.

-- 
Jonathan D. Rosenberg, Ph.D.                600 Lanidex Plaza
Chief Technology Officer                    Parsippany, NJ 07054-2711
dynamicsoft
[email-masked]                     FAX:   (973) 952-5050
http://www.jdrosen.net                      PHONE: (973) 952-5000
http://www.dynamicsoft.com