Re: [MMUSIC] Last Call:draft-ietf-mmusic-sdp-capability-negotiation (SDP CapabilityNegotiation) to Proposed Standard

["Dan Wing" <dwing at cisco.com>]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: mmusic-bounces at ietf.org 
> [mailto:mmusic-bounces at ietf.org] On Behalf Of Krishna Prasad Kalluri
> Sent: Sunday, October 05, 2008 10:54 AM
> To: mmusic at ietf.org
> Cc: fandreas at cisco.com
> Subject: Re: [MMUSIC] Last 
> Call:draft-ietf-mmusic-sdp-capability-negotiation (SDP 
> CapabilityNegotiation) to Proposed Standard
> 
> Hi,
> 
> I have been reading sdp-capability-negotiation document.
> This document currently describes methods to negotiate different RTP
> profiles (transport capabilities)
> 
> Is there any method to negotiate different components in 'c' line. Did
> you consider this during the design of SDP capability negotiation?
> How about different IP version negotiation?
>
> If I understand it's possible to have dual IP stacks. Is there any way
> to negotiate which version of IP to use.

ICE provides for negotiation of IP version of the media path,
with a significant advantage:  using the IP version that *works*.

For SIP, it is described in draft-ietf-sipping-v6-transition-07.txt and 
I expect a similar technique could be used for RTSP 2.0.

-d

> There can be middle boxes to provide gatewaying different 
> versions of IP
> or tunneling. I am wondering about the end to end negotiation
> mechanisms. 
> 
> Regards
> Krishna
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: mmusic-bounces at ietf.org 
> [mailto:mmusic-bounces at ietf.org] On Behalf
> Of The IESG
> Sent: den 29 september 2008 18:11
> To: IETF-Announce
> Cc: mmusic at ietf.org
> Subject: [MMUSIC] Last Call:
> draft-ietf-mmusic-sdp-capability-negotiation (SDP Capability
> Negotiation) to Proposed Standard
> 
> The IESG has received a request from the Multiparty Multimedia Session
> Control WG (mmusic) to consider the following document:
> 
> - 'SDP Capability Negotiation '
>    <draft-ietf-mmusic-sdp-capability-negotiation-09.txt> as a Proposed
> Standard
> 
> The IESG plans to make a decision in the next few weeks, and solicits
> final comments on this action.  Please send substantive 
> comments to the
> ietf at ietf.org mailing lists by 2008-10-13. Exceptionally, comments may
> be sent to iesg at ietf.org instead. In either case, please retain the
> beginning of the Subject line to allow automated sorting.
> 
> The file can be obtained via
> http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-mmusic-sdp-capa
bility-neg
> otiation-09.txt
> 
> 
> IESG discussion can be tracked via
> https://datatracker.ietf.org/public/pidtracker.cgi?command=vie
w_id&dTag=
> 15573&rfc_flag=0
> 
> _______________________________________________
> mmusic mailing list
> mmusic at ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mmusic
> _______________________________________________
> mmusic mailing list
> mmusic at ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mmusic

_______________________________________________
mmusic mailing list
mmusic at ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mmusic