[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: alternate RTP profiles in SDP offer/answer



"Desineni, Harikishan" <hdesinen@xxxxxxxxxxxx> writes:
>> > Indeed, RFC4585 is referring to RFC 3388 for such grouping.  Per
>> > RFC4585, overloading two "m=" lines isn't a violation of the standard
>> > when negotiating RTP/AVP and RTP/AVPF profiles.
>> 
>> Unfortunately, though, SDP parsers that don't implement
>> RFC4585 aren't aware of RFC4585's permission to do this.
>
>A reasonably good SDP parser which understands grouping (RFC3388) and
>FID semantics would reject a grouped "m=" line offered with unknown RTP
>profile. 

There's an SDP parser (and application) that understands and handles RFC 3388?
1/2 :-)  Seriously, I'm sure there are some, and I'm also pretty darn certain
they're rare.  I'd love it if I was wrong.

-- 
Randell Jesup, Worldgate (developers of the Ojo videophone), ex-Amiga OS team
rjesup@xxxxxxxxx
"The fetters imposed on liberty at home have ever been forged out of the weapons
provided for defence against real, pretended, or imaginary dangers from abroad."
		- James Madison, 4th US president (1751-1836)