Re: Existing missmatch between SDP mux and BUNDLE

Hi,

>I much prefer use of the term "media description" as well since this is well-defined in 4566.

Actually, the PR suggests “m= section”. That is used in JSEP, but in 4566 there is “media description” and “media-level section”. I am not really sure that the difference is, because I find both:


        "Each media description starts with an "m=" field and is terminated by either the next "m=“ field”

…and:

        "Each media-level section starts with an "m=" line and continues to the next media-level section"

So, it seems the RFC uses inconsistent terminology.

Now, I had a look at draft-4566bis, and it seems like “m=“ field has been removed. But, both “media description” and “media-level section” are still used.

Regards,

Christer




On 9/22/17 4:08 PM, Taylor Brandstetter wrote:
Right. I can only think of one possible interpretation of "add attribute to media description". RFC4566 uses the following phrases:

  *   "attributes ... may be added"
  *   "attribute ... in the media description"
  *   "attribute is present"
  *   "a media description may have any number of attributes"
  *   "attribute fields can ... be added"
  *   "specifying the attribute"
  *   "session description containing such attributes"
  *   "attribute MUST be included"

So, the following would be consistent with the defined terminology:

  *   "The offerer MUST add the foo attribute to the media description."
  *   "The foo attribute MUST be [present|contained|specified|included] in the media description."
  *   "The media description MUST have the foo attribute."

But "foo attribute MUST be associated with the m-line"? Not so much.

On Fri, Sep 22, 2017 at 9:51 PM, Christer Holmberg <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
Hi,

>> It depends on how we interpret "associated with"
>
> That's why I purged "associated with" from the BUNDLE spec: https://github.com/taylor-b/draft-sdp-bundle/pull/1
>
> It almost always can be interpreted in multiple ways. Unfortunately this never got integrated, I assume because I was too late.

No, you were not :) I have been looking at your CR, and have been considering to integrate it, but I lately I have been so busy with draft-dtls-sdp etc.

Having said that, we have changed the terminology in bundle a number of times already - we really need to stop at some point.

The history of "associated" is when people commented that one cannot add an attribute, address etc to an m- line (because attributes, c- lines and m- lines are separate SDP properties). So, instead of talking about adding those to an m- line talk about associating those with an m- line.

Now, if I remember the changes in your PR correctly, you are talking about "media descriptions", which would be an "envelope" containing the m- line, the address and attributes associated with that m- line. Then you could say "add attribute to the media description", etc. Right?

Regards,

Christer

_______________________________________________
mmusic mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mmusic