- From: Sergio Garcia Murillo <sergio.garcia.murillo@gmail.com>
- Date: Mon, 20 Oct 2014 11:45:53 +0200
- To: Singh Varun <varun.singh@aalto.fi>
- CC: Peter Thatcher <pthatcher@google.com>, "public-ortc@w3.org" <public-ortc@w3.org>
- Message-ID: <5444D9D1.3000503@gmail.com>
Making the FEC stream has it's own SSRC and avoiding the current RED/FEC non-sense has always seemed the correct approach to me. So this are great news! Do you know if this has been already presented/discussed at rtcweb? In regards ORTC, this opens another question, how to associate several SSRCs in one RTPSender/RTPReceiver or be able to group different objects together. This seems to be already an issue with RTX packets (and I was already working on an email in this regards). Best regards Sergio On 20/10/2014 11:31, Singh Varun wrote: > There are several issues with RFC5109, we have attempted to fix those > in > https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-singh-payload-rtp-1d2d-parity-scheme-00. > I hope WebRTC folks will review and give feedback. Discussion on the > PAYLOAD WG, and Github if you have pull requests > https://github.com/vr000m/payload-1d2d-parity-fec/ > > Synchronization Source (SSRC):The SSRC value SHALL be randomly > assigned as suggested by [RFC3550 <https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc3550>]. This allows the sender to > multiplex the source and repair flows on the same port, or > multiplex multiple repair flows on a single port. The repair > flows SHOULD use the RTCP CNAME field to associate themselves with > the source flow. > > >> On 17 Oct 2014, at 23:19, Sergio Garcia Murillo >> <sergio.garcia.murillo@gmail.com >> <mailto:sergio.garcia.murillo@gmail.com>> wrote: >> >> Yes sorry, dyslexia, quite late here.. :) >> >> On 17/10/2014 22:16, Peter Thatcher wrote: >>> I think you mean 5109 >>> >>> http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc5109 >>> >>> On Fri, Oct 17, 2014 at 1:11 PM, Sergio Garcia Murillo >>> <sergio.garcia.murillo@gmail.com >>> <mailto:sergio.garcia.murillo@gmail.com>> wrote: >>> >>> Hi all, >>> >>> One question, in the current draft it is stated: >>> >>> >>> 9.10.1Dictionary|RTCRtpFecParameters| >>> <http://ortc.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/08/ortc.html#idl-def-RTCRtpFecParameters>Members >>> >>> |mechanism|of typeDOMString >>> >>> The Forward Error Correction (FEC) mechanism to use. >>> >>> |ssrc|of typeunsigned long >>> >>> The SSRC to use for FEC. >>> >>> >>> But according to RFC 5190: >>> >>> Synchronization Source (SSRC): The SSRC value SHALL be the same as >>> the SSRC value of the media stream it protects. >>> >>> >>> So it doesn't seem right to allow configuring the ssrc of the >>> FEC stream >>> >>> Best regards >>> Sergio >>> >>> >> >
Received on Monday, 20 October 2014 09:46:17 UTC