draft-ietf-avtcore-5761-update-00.txt   draft-ietf-avtcore-5761-update-01.txt 
Network Working Group C. Holmberg Network Working Group C. Holmberg
Internet-Draft Ericsson Internet-Draft Ericsson
Updates: 5761 (if approved) July 5, 2016 Updates: 5761 (if approved) August 10, 2016
Intended status: Standards Track Intended status: Standards Track
Expires: January 6, 2017 Expires: February 11, 2017
Updates to RFC 5761 Updates to RFC 5761
draft-ietf-avtcore-5761-update-00.txt draft-ietf-avtcore-5761-update-01.txt
Abstract Abstract
This document updates RFC 5761 by clarifying the SDP offer/answer This document updates RFC 5761 by clarifying the SDP offer/answer
negotiation of RTP and RTCP multiplexing. It makes it clear that an negotiation of RTP and RTCP multiplexing. It makes it clear that an
answerer can only include an "a=rtcp-mux" attribute in an SDP answer answerer can only include an "a=rtcp-mux" attribute in an SDP answer
if the associated SDP offer contained the attribute. if the associated SDP offer contained the attribute.
Status of This Memo Status of This Memo
skipping to change at page 1, line 34 skipping to change at page 1, line 34
Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering
Task Force (IETF). Note that other groups may also distribute Task Force (IETF). Note that other groups may also distribute
working documents as Internet-Drafts. The list of current Internet- working documents as Internet-Drafts. The list of current Internet-
Drafts is at http://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/. Drafts is at http://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/.
Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months
and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any
time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference
material or to cite them other than as "work in progress." material or to cite them other than as "work in progress."
This Internet-Draft will expire on January 6, 2017. This Internet-Draft will expire on February 11, 2017.
Copyright Notice Copyright Notice
Copyright (c) 2016 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the Copyright (c) 2016 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the
document authors. All rights reserved. document authors. All rights reserved.
This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal
Provisions Relating to IETF Documents Provisions Relating to IETF Documents
(http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of (http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of
publication of this document. Please review these documents publication of this document. Please review these documents
skipping to change at page 4, line 23 skipping to change at page 4, line 23
This offer denotes a unicast voice-over-IP session using the RTP/AVP This offer denotes a unicast voice-over-IP session using the RTP/AVP
profile with iLBC coding. The answerer is requested to send both RTP profile with iLBC coding. The answerer is requested to send both RTP
and RTCP to port 49170 on IPv6 address 2001:DB8::211:24ff:fea3:7a2e. and RTCP to port 49170 on IPv6 address 2001:DB8::211:24ff:fea3:7a2e.
If the offer contains the "a=rtcp-mux" attribute, and if the answerer If the offer contains the "a=rtcp-mux" attribute, and if the answerer
wishes to multiplex RTP and RTCP onto a single port, it MUST include a wishes to multiplex RTP and RTCP onto a single port, it MUST include a
media-level "a=rtcp-mux" attribute in the answer. The RTP payload media-level "a=rtcp-mux" attribute in the answer. The RTP payload
types used in the answer MUST conform to the rules in Section 4. If types used in the answer MUST conform to the rules in Section 4. If
the offer does not contain the "a=rtcp-mux" attribute the answerer the offer does not contain the "a=rtcp-mux" attribute the answerer
MUST NOT include an attribute in the answer, and the answerer MUST NOT MUST NOT include an "a=rtcp-mux" attribute in the answer, and the
multiplex RTP and RTCP packets on a single port. answerer MUST NOT multiplex RTP and RTCP packets on a single port.
If the answerer includes an "a=rtcp-mux" attribute in the answer, the If the answerer includes an "a=rtcp-mux" attribute in the answer, the
offerer and answerer MUST multiplex RTP and RTCP packets on a single offerer and answerer MUST multiplex RTP and RTCP packets on a single
port. port.
If the answer does not contain an "a=rtcp-mux" attribute, the offerer If the answer does not contain an "a=rtcp-mux" attribute, the offerer
and answerer MUST NOT multiplex RTP and RTCP packets on a single port. and answerer MUST NOT multiplex RTP and RTCP packets on a single port.
Instead, they should send and receive RTCP on a port allocated Instead, they should send and receive RTCP on a port allocated
according to the usual port-selection rules (either the port pair, or according to the usual port-selection rules (either the port pair, or
a signalled port if the "a=rtcp:" attribute [10] is also included). a signalled port if the "a=rtcp:" attribute [10] is also included).
skipping to change at page 5, line 11 skipping to change at page 5, line 11
The security considerations for RTP and RTCP multiplexing are The security considerations for RTP and RTCP multiplexing are
described in RFC 5761. This specification does not impact those described in RFC 5761. This specification does not impact those
security considerations. security considerations.
5. IANA Considerations 5. IANA Considerations
This specifcation makes no requests from IANA. This specifcation makes no requests from IANA.
6. Acknowledgements 6. Acknowledgements
TBD Thanks to Colin Perkins, Magnus Westerlund, Paul Kyzivat, Roni Even
for providing comments on the document. Thomas Belling provided
useful input in the discussions that took place in 3GPP and resulated
in the submission of the document.
7. Change Log 7. Change Log
[RFC EDITOR NOTE: Please remove this section when publishing] [RFC EDITOR NOTE: Please remove this section when publishing]
Changes from foo Change from -00
o Add text o Editorial changes based on WGLC comments from Roni Even.
8. Normative References 8. Normative References
[RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate [RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate
Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119,
DOI 10.17487/RFC2119, March 1997, DOI 10.17487/RFC2119, March 1997,
<http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc2119>. <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc2119>.
[RFC3264] Rosenberg, J. and H. Schulzrinne, "An Offer/Answer Model [RFC3264] Rosenberg, J. and H. Schulzrinne, "An Offer/Answer Model
with Session Description Protocol (SDP)", RFC 3264, with Session Description Protocol (SDP)", RFC 3264,
 End of changes. 8 change blocks. 
9 lines changed or deleted 12 lines changed or added

This html diff was produced by rfcdiff 1.45. The latest version is available from http://tools.ietf.org/tools/rfcdiff/