Re: [AVT] New draft-ietf-avt-mpeg4-simple-07

[Colin Perkins <csp@isi.edu>]

Guido,

--> Franceschini Guido writes:
>Jan,
>
>unfortunately I have to disagree with the text you modified with respect 
>to Colin's text.
>I am fine with supporting early implementations, but the wording used 
>is, IMHO, not suitable. More specifically you wrote:
>
>   If the "constantDuration" parameter is not present, then Access
>   Units are assumed to have a variable duration, unless the AU-Index
>   is present and coded with the value 0 in each RTP packet.
>
>How can a receiver implement the rule above? Should it observe 1, 10, 
>1000 or infinite packets before determining that the "AU-Index is 
>present and coded with the value 0 in each RTP packet" ?

One packet is sufficient.  If the Access Units have variable duration, the
AU-Index will never be zero, if they have fixed duration it will always be
zero. The rest of the paragraph you quoted makes this explicit.

>What is the exact legacy that you want to support ? Maybe there is a 
>different mechanism to support it. For example, a specific mode 
>definition might IMPLY a specific "constantDuration" value, without 
>writing this explicitely in the SDP.

Not if it wishes to comply with this specification.

Colin
_______________________________________________
Audio/Video Transport Working Group
avt@ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/avt