Subject: [MMUSIC] WGLC of last set of changes to Bundle (draft-ietf-mmusic-sdp-bundle-negotiation-22)

From: Flemming Andreasen <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 22 Jun 2015 09:01:18 -0400

Greetings

We have had a couple of WGLCs of the bundle draft already with 
subsequent updates to address comments received. This is to announce a 
final 1 week WGLC on the last set of bundle draft changes in

https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-mmusic-sdp-bundle-negotiation-22

since the -19 version as reflected by

https://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url1=draft-ietf-mmusic-sdp-bundle-negotiation-19&url2=draft-ietf-mmusic-sdp-bundle-negotiation-22

Please take a look at these changes and let us know if you have any 
comments by Monday June 29. Comments should be sent to the document 
authors and the MMUSIC WG list. If you review the changes but do not 
have any comments, please send a note to that effect as well.

Thanks

     Flemming (MMUSIC co-chair)

---

From: Paul Kyzivat <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 22 Jun 2015 09:42:23 -0400

I'm fine with this. -22 resolved my last comments.

	Thanks,
	Paul

On 6/22/15 9:01 AM, Flemming Andreasen wrote:
> _______________________________________________
> mmusic mailing list
> [email-masked]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mmusic
>

---

From: "Stach, Thomas" <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 22 Jun 2015 14:39:34 +0000

I did a review of the changes in -22. 
It looks good to go, I just came across a few typos. 

Section 9.1
1st para:   associate a received data --> associate received data
2nd para:   if a received data can be associated --> if received data can be associated

Section 10.2, 
4th para:   they will use or RTP and RTCP --> they will use for RTP and RTCP

Regards
Thomas

> -----Original Message-----
> From: mmusic [mailto:[email-masked]] On Behalf Of Flemming Andreasen
> Sent: Montag, 22. Juni 2015 15:01
> To: mmusic
> Cc: [email-masked]
> Subject: [MMUSIC] WGLC of last set of changes to Bundle (draft-ietf-mmusic-
> sdp-bundle-negotiation-22)
> 
> Greetings
> 
> https://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url1=draft-ietf-mmusic-sdp-bundle-negotiation-
> 19&url2=draft-ietf-mmusic-sdp-bundle-negotiation-22
>

---

From: Christer Holmberg <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 22 Jun 2015 16:28:23 +0000

Hi Thomas,

Thanks for the review! I will fix as suggested.

Regards,

Christer

-----Original Message-----
From: mmusic [mailto:[email-masked]] On Behalf Of Stach, Thomas
Sent: 22 June 2015 17:40
To: mmusic
Subject: Re: [MMUSIC] WGLC of last set of changes to Bundle (draft-ietf-mmusic-sdp-bundle-negotiation-22)

Section 9.1

Section 10.2, 

Regards
Thomas

---

From: Magnus Westerlund <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 23 Jun 2015 10:13:55 +0200

Hi,

I looked at the changes and wonder if I spotted an inconsistency? 
Otherwise things looks good.

In Section 5 text was changed to enable non-symmetric RTP usages. 
Resulting in the following text:

    The address:port combination used for sending bundled media
    MAY be the same as the BUNDLE address, used to receive bundled media,
    depending on whether symmetric RTP [RFC4961] is used.

 From 10.3.1:

    If RTP/RTCP multiplexing is enabled, the same address:port
    combination will be used for receiving (and sending) all RTP packets
    and the RTCP packets associated with the BUNDLE group.  Each endpoint
    will send the packets towards the BUNDLE address of the other
    endpoint.

This appears to strongly suggest that one should/must use symmetric RTP 
when doing RTP/RTCP muxing. However, I find nothing in RFC 5761 that 
mandates usage of symmetric RTP with RTP/RTCP Mux, even if it the text 
is written with that as an assumption, I find nothing that prevents 
non-symmetric sending.

Thus, I wonder if the text in 10.3.1 needs to be updated to avoid this 
issue.

Cheers

Magnus Westerlund

----------------------------------------------------------------------
Services, Media and Network features, Ericsson Research EAB/TXM
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Ericsson AB                 | Phone  +46 10 7148287
Färögatan 6                 | Mobile +46 73 0949079
SE-164 80 Stockholm, Sweden | mailto: [email-masked]
----------------------------------------------------------------------

---

From: Christer Holmberg <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 25 Jun 2015 05:19:24 +0000

Hi Magnus,

Thanks for your comment!

Regarding RTP/RTCP mux, I guess it should be clarified that one uses single address:ports for sending and receiving RTP and RTCP, but that those address:ports don't have to be the same.

I'll think of some wording.

Regards,

Christer

Sent from my Windows Phone
________________________________
From: Magnus Westerlund<mailto:[email-masked]>
Sent: ‎23/‎06/‎2015 10:14
To: mmusic<mailto:[email-masked]>
Cc: [email-masked]<mailto:[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [MMUSIC] WGLC of last set of changes to Bundle (draft-ietf-mmusic-sdp-bundle-negotiation-22)

Hi,

 From 10.3.1:

Cheers

Magnus Westerlund