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

Re: [AVT] Inconsistent attribute name in RFC 3611

I just checked and the Cisco IPTV code uses rcvr-rtt.
Just goes to show that for implementers they copy stuff from the examples rather than the spec!
So, we'd obviously prefer that the errata change the IANA registration and the spec text rather than the example, but if given some time to switch (it takes 2 release to make such a change since this is a red/ green style packet problem) we can deal with either. 

DaveO.



-----Original Message-----
From: avt-bounces at ietf.org [mailto:avt-bounces at ietf.org] On

Behalf Of

Tom Taylor
Sent: Thursday, April 02, 2009 7:16 PM
To: IETF AVT WG
Subject: [AVT] Inconsistent attribute name in RFC 3611

RFC 3611 defines the attribute rcvr-rtt in the SDP section,

but uses

recv-rtt in the text and the IANA Considerations section.

Alan Clark

suggests that the SDP section should prevail, but it seems

like a good

idea to check on what has been implemented first. Do people

have views

one way or the other?

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