Colin Perkins wrote:On 14 Oct 2005, at 17:11, Dan Wing wrote:o For unicast sessions, the reduced value MAY be used by participants that are not active data senders as well, and the delay before sending the initial compound RTCP packet MAY be zero.
the authors consider it appropriate for RTP No-Op's "Request Early
RTCP" bit to allow unicast sessions which support RTP No-Op in offer /
answer to send RTCP reports immediately upon receipt of a No-Op packet
with the "Request Early RTCP" bit set. We need to adhere to section
6.2 of RFC3550 and the rules of whatever profile we're using, but we'd
like to remove the requirement that No-Op can only use AVPF.
Any comments on this direction?
You need to be careful to avoid implosion, in case the session has many members. This can occur even if you have a unicast connection, since you might be talking to an RTP translator, so something like the AVPF timing rules is needed.
Fair enough. So if we add careful wording to that effect, we can then use RTP No-Op with with RTP profiles other than *AVPF, e.g. RTP/AVP or RTP/SAVP ?
Colin
_______________________________________________ Audio/Video Transport Working Group avt at ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/avt