Re: [AVT] FMT numbers in your draft

["Ali C. Begen (abegen)" <abegen at cisco.com>]

Sure, we will make the necessary changes in the revision. We are also working on a format that will need only one FMT number for the protocol, and then we will use a field something like "sub fmt" to further specify which specific message we are using.

Thanks for the heads-up.

-acbegen 

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Roni Even [mailto:ron.even.tlv at gmail.com] 
> Sent: Tuesday, April 14, 2009 3:09 AM
> To: 'Zeev Vax'; Ali C. Begen (abegen); Bill Ver Steeg 
> (versteb); 'Peilin YANG'
> Cc: avt at ietf.org; 'Tom Taylor'
> Subject: FMT numbers in your draft
> 
> Hi guys,
> 
> Since we have the RTP rapid synchronization as a WG item I 
> suggest they use the fmt=5 and that for new RTPFB that will 
> be specified in any new work will use the following numbers 
> when it is a WG item
> 
>  
> 
> Regards
> 
> Roni Even
> 
> AVT co-chair 
> 
>