draft-ietf-avtcore-5761-update-01.txt   draft-ietf-avtcore-5761-update-02.txt 
Network Working Group C. Holmberg Network Working Group C. Holmberg
Internet-Draft Ericsson Internet-Draft Ericsson
Updates: 5761 (if approved) August 10, 2016 Updates: 5761 (if approved) September 15, 2016
Intended status: Standards Track Intended status: Standards Track
Expires: February 11, 2017 Expires: March 19, 2017
Updates to RFC 5761 Updates to RFC 5761
draft-ietf-avtcore-5761-update-01.txt draft-ietf-avtcore-5761-update-02.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 February 11, 2017. This Internet-Draft will expire on March 19, 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
carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with respect carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with respect
to this document. Code Components extracted from this document must to this document. Code Components extracted from this document must
include Simplified BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of include Simplified BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of
the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as
described in the Simplified BSD License. described in the Simplified BSD License.
This document may contain material from IETF Documents or IETF
Contributions published or made publicly available before November
10, 2008. The person(s) controlling the copyright in some of this
material may not have granted the IETF Trust the right to allow
modifications of such material outside the IETF Standards Process.
Without obtaining an adequate license from the person(s) controlling
the copyright in such materials, this document may not be modified
outside the IETF Standards Process, and derivative works of it may
not be created outside the IETF Standards Process, except to format
it for publication as an RFC or to translate it into languages other
than English.
Table of Contents Table of Contents
1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
2. Conventions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 2. Conventions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
3. Update to RFC 5761 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 3. Update to RFC 5761 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
3.1. Update to the sixth paragraph of section 5 . . . . . . . 2 3.1. Update to section 5.1.1 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
4. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 4. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
5. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 5. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
6. Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 6. Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
7. Change Log . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 7. Change Log . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
8. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 8. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
Author's Address . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 Author's Address . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
1. Introduction 1. Introduction
RFC 5761 [RFC5761] specifies how to multiplex RTP data packets and RFC 5761 [RFC5761] specifies how to multiplex RTP data packets and
RTP Control Protocol (RTCP) packets on a single UDP port, and how to RTP Control Protocol (RTCP) packets on a single UDP port, and how to
negotiate usage of such multiplexing using the SDP offer/answer negotiate usage of such multiplexing using the SDP offer/answer
mechanism [RFC3264], using an "a=rtcp-mux" attribute. However, the mechanism [RFC3264], using an "a=rtcp-mux" attribute. However, the
text is unclear on whether an answerer is allowed to include the text is unclear on whether an answerer is allowed to include the
attribute in an answer even if the associated offer did not contain attribute in an answer even if the associated offer did not contain
an attribute. an attribute.
skipping to change at page 2, line 42 skipping to change at page 3, line 7
directions. directions.
2. Conventions 2. Conventions
The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT", The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT",
"SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this
document are to be interpreted as described in [RFC2119]. document are to be interpreted as described in [RFC2119].
3. Update to RFC 5761 3. Update to RFC 5761
This section updates section 5.1.1 of RFC 5761. This section updates section 5.1.1 of RFC 5761 by clarifying that an
answerer can only include an "a=rtcp-mux" attribute in an answer if
the associated offer contained the attribute, and by clarifying that
the negotiation of RTP and RTCP multiplexing is for usage in both
directions.
3.1. Update to the sixth paragraph of section 5 3.1. Update to section 5.1.1
OLD TEXT: OLD TEXT:
When the Session Description Protocol (SDP) [8] is used to negotiate When the Session Description Protocol (SDP) [8] is used to negotiate
RTP sessions following the offer/answer model [9], the "a=rtcp-mux" RTP sessions following the offer/answer model [9], the "a=rtcp-mux"
attribute (see Section 8) indicates the desire to multiplex RTP and attribute (see Section 8) indicates the desire to multiplex RTP and
RTCP onto a single port. The initial SDP offer MUST include this RTCP onto a single port. The initial SDP offer MUST include this
attribute at the media level to request multiplexing of RTP and RTCP attribute at the media level to request multiplexing of RTP and RTCP
on a single port. For example: on a single port. For example:
skipping to change at page 5, line 20 skipping to change at page 5, line 33
Thanks to Colin Perkins, Magnus Westerlund, Paul Kyzivat, Roni Even Thanks to Colin Perkins, Magnus Westerlund, Paul Kyzivat, Roni Even
for providing comments on the document. Thomas Belling provided for providing comments on the document. Thomas Belling provided
useful input in the discussions that took place in 3GPP and resulated useful input in the discussions that took place in 3GPP and resulated
in the submission of the document. 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]
Change from -01
o pre-RFC5378 disclaimer added.
Change from -00 Change from -00
o Editorial changes based on WGLC comments from Roni Even. 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>.
 End of changes. 10 change blocks. 
10 lines changed or deleted 30 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/