W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-webrtc@w3.org > August 2012

Re: Do we need two ways of identifying m-lines?

From: Justin Uberti <juberti@google.com>
Date: Mon, 20 Aug 2012 08:21:57 -0700
Message-ID: <CAOJ7v-0A23okEQG0bjdD7X-qtagZHBCgGAw+6JeBejHWtRG_pQ@mail.gmail.com>
To: Eric Rescorla <ekr@rtfm.com>
Cc: Harald Alvestrand <harald@alvestrand.no>, public-webrtc@w3.org
Jingle doesn't have the same index-based m= line concept, it does
everything by <content/> name, which is mappable to "mid".

I also think the m= index strategy has several shortcomings, so using "mid"
when available allows us to avoid chaining ourselves to m= index.


On Sun, Aug 19, 2012 at 5:06 PM, Eric Rescorla <ekr@rtfm.com> wrote:

> On Sun, Aug 19, 2012 at 12:29 PM, Harald Alvestrand
> <harald@alvestrand.no> wrote:
> > On 08/19/2012 05:46 PM, Eric Rescorla wrote:
> >>
> >> The current RTCIceCandidate type has two ways of identifying the m-line,
> >> an m-line index (sdpMLineIndex) and an sdpMid, corresponding
> >> to the RFC 3388 media stream identification value.
> >
> > The reason for the index is that we can't guarantee that a remote offer
> will
> > have unique labels on all its M-lines.
> >
> > For offers produced by WebRTC, we can choose to make them all have mid
> > values (and they have to, if we use BUNDLE).
>
> Hmm...
>
> It sounds to me like index will always work but that label won't, so why
> not just always use index? What am I missing?
>
> -Ekr
>
>
Received on Monday, 20 August 2012 15:22:45 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 20 August 2012 15:22:46 GMT