[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
[MMUSIC] An error in SDP syntax regarding r= lines?
- To: mmusic@ietf.org
- Subject: [MMUSIC] An error in SDP syntax regarding r= lines?
- From: Federico Montesino Pouzols <fedemp@suidzer0.org>
- Date: Thu, 27 Jun 2002 22:31:09 +0200
- List-Id: Multiparty Multimedia Session Control Working Group <mmusic.ietf.org>
- Mail-Followup-To: mmusic@ietf.org
- Reply-To: Federico Montesino Pouzols <fedemp@suidzer0.org>
- Sender: mmusic-admin@ietf.org
- User-Agent: Mutt/1.3.25i
Hello everyone,
On section 6 in draft-ietf-mmusic-sdp-new-10.txt the following
examples of r= lines are given:
# r=604800 3600 0 90000
# r=7d 1h 0 25h
From this examples, I understand that "0" is a valid value for the
offsets. However on appendix A r= lines are defined like this:
# repeat-fields = "r=" repeat-interval SP typed-time
# 1*(SP typed-time)
# repeat-interval = typed-time
# typed-time = POS-DIGIT *DIGIT [fixed-len-time-unit]
# POS-DIGIT = %x31-39 ; 1 - 9
The two examples above would violate this syntax, since the first
offset is "0", which is not a POS-DIGIT. In RFC 2327, typed-time
started with DIGIT, so there was no problem.
It seems to me, correct me please if I am wrong, that the first
offset, "0", is not necessary and could be assumed. Anyway, to keep
backward compatibility it has to be there. Would the following rule
solve the problem?
# repeat-fields = "r=" repeat-interval SP typed-time SP "0"
# 1*(SP typed-time)
_______________________________________________
mmusic mailing list
mmusic@ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mmusic