[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

RE: [AVT] RFC 3984 offer/answer Question



>The level is the highest level supported so level 3 means that you also support level 1. This is specified in RFC 3984.

>B can offer level 3.


But still a separate profile-level-id ftmp line per level should be acceptable (as worst-case scenario), right?



From: "Even, Roni" <roni.even at polycom.co.il>
Sent: Tuesday, August 14, 2007 7:38 AM
To: "Yuval Nissan" <Yuval.Nissan at audiocodes.com>, <avt at ietf.org>
Subject: RE: [AVT] RFC 3984 offer/answer Question


Yuval,

The level is the highest level supported so level 3 means that you also support level 1. This is specified in RFC 3984.

B can offer level 3.

Roni Even

 


From: Yuval Nissan [mailto:Yuval.Nissan at audiocodes.com]
Sent: Monday, August 13, 2007 7:35 PM
To: avt at ietf.org
Subject: [AVT] RFC 3984 offer/answer Question

 

Hi,

 

I would like to clarify the following scenario:

 

A and B use the same H.264 profile and packetization mode (this assumption is only for simplicity).

A supports up to level 3.0, and B supports only level 1.0.

A doesn't know the level supported by B, and it wants to start the negotiation as offerer.

 

My understanding is that A needs to send in the SDP new attribute for each level from 1.0 to 3.0 in order to ensure interoperability. Is this correct?

 

Regards,

Yuval

 

 

 

 


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