[MMUSIC] BUNDLE/SDP : ISSUE#1: Should BUNDLE allow/disallow PT sharing ??

Suhas Nandakumar <suhasietf@gmail.com> Tue, 22 October 2013 06:36 UTC

Return-Path: <suhasietf@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: mmusic@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: mmusic@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DC6F911E8484 for <mmusic@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 21 Oct 2013 23:36:41 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.856
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.856 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.143, BAYES_00=-2.599, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, J_CHICKENPOX_15=0.6, NO_RELAYS=-0.001]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id n9sc-bR4pmX6 for <mmusic@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 21 Oct 2013 23:36:41 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-wg0-x22e.google.com (mail-wg0-x22e.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:400c:c00::22e]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 338E011E847E for <mmusic@ietf.org>; Mon, 21 Oct 2013 23:36:23 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-wg0-f46.google.com with SMTP id m15so7543813wgh.25 for <mmusic@ietf.org>; Mon, 21 Oct 2013 23:36:20 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:date:message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type; bh=LZukQVwrfzYCAotSDeLyLQJ5cCrXrgPKN/h8VAuDtPw=; b=Kcrnty8qx/LFtnIQE0mKj7XSV75GpiWL2E+itH4a1RmAILoTJ6Nwb1FAufW2XEqrnF +8F1odauQL2auwo5AihhDbV/jTnx8C8Gt+cQObOl+tZhX74BoUkLTtxvyt3eBHW4qL+b SIqBZdnlIDOlPPQqVeBTn8+dGc8pg/7UZIxgrAQ2YhhDpwfhQnDQQauMVXUgH9wELJtS tKRrsjmYAsFmHhf2//NwCFoIR39u+Abxr1h4TmtjgX2AvRVheUoFCm3kcMQplf8hPYe2 8qIv4B2Nwkvd5MJ3XZE7S8kM/yrSkxNjSPEVRY0VV1P7uo74izjeoqS6ys8gtxxdX3zU Ghlw==
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.180.185.101 with SMTP id fb5mr12960218wic.11.1382423780036; Mon, 21 Oct 2013 23:36:20 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.194.178.231 with HTTP; Mon, 21 Oct 2013 23:36:20 -0700 (PDT)
Date: Mon, 21 Oct 2013 23:36:20 -0700
Message-ID: <CAMRcRGQd6YvrWnUw77JMpNT4GFH6ce-FT8LxeywV6_pZ9w=n3w@mail.gmail.com>
From: Suhas Nandakumar <suhasietf@gmail.com>
To: mmusic WG <mmusic@ietf.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="001a11c2448e56982204e94e9e2e"
Cc: Cullen Jennings <fluffy@cisco.com>, Harald Alvestrand <hta@google.com>, Christer Holmberg <christer.holmberg@ericsson.com>
Subject: [MMUSIC] BUNDLE/SDP : ISSUE#1: Should BUNDLE allow/disallow PT sharing ??
X-BeenThere: mmusic@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: Multiparty Multimedia Session Control Working Group <mmusic.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/mmusic>, <mailto:mmusic-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/mmusic>
List-Post: <mailto:mmusic@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:mmusic-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mmusic>, <mailto:mmusic-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 22 Oct 2013 06:36:42 -0000

Hello All

   Section 5.2 in the draft-nandakumar-mmusic-sdp-mux-attributes-05 defines
one category of OPEN ISSUE that was raised while analyzing multiplexing
behavior of RFC4855, RFC5583 attributes for example.

As an example, let's consider the  SDP Example (copied from the draft)


// PTs are shared and have different feedback types
   a=group:BUNDLE audio video
   m=audio 3456 RTP/AVP 98
   a=mid:audio
   a=rtpmap:98 iLBC/8000
   a=rtcp-fb ack                  // Positive ACK
   m=video 3456 RTP/AVP 98
   a=mid:video
   a=rtpmap:98 VP8/90000
   a-rtcp-fb:98 nack rpsi        // Nack ACK


In the above case, PT 98 is repeated between the audio and video media
lines. Audio media line has rtcp-fb ack and video media line has rtcp-fb
nack.

Since RTCP reporting happens per RTP Session, we can see the following high
level questions :

0. Should this be allowed ?

1. What should be the expected behavior in this scenario ?

2. What category assignment makes sense in here - IDENTICAL or NORMAL ??


Cheers
Suhas