RE: [rtcweb] H.264 SVC and BUNDLE

There is an ongoing discussion on the MMUSIC list about the interaction
between BUNDLE and dependency groupings (which are used in RFC 6190 to
describe linkage between layers).  See:
http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/mmusic/current/msg09520.html

The issue is not so much about exactly how BUNDLE and existing SDP
functionality interact (I am assuming that will get figured out eventually),
but rather about the implications of using evolving SDP proposals in an API.


Do we expect the SDP output by the API to change as the IETF drafts change?
Or are we really talking about "dialects" of SDP, one spoken between an
application and the browser (presumably maintained by W3C) and another
dialect spoken on the wire (presumably maintained by IETF MMUSIC) that
growing increasingly out of sync over time? 



-----Original Message-----
From: rtcweb-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:rtcweb-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of
Christer Holmberg
Sent: Wednesday, August 29, 2012 11:50 AM
To: public-webrtc@w3.org; rtcweb@ietf.org
Subject: [rtcweb] H.264 SVC and BUNDLE

Hi,

At the telco yesterday one of the Microsoft guys claimed that H.264 SVC does
not work with BUNDLE, but he didn't have the details.

Could someone please explain the reason why he/she doesn't think H.264 SVC
work with BUNDLE?

(Note, that if using the same port for the different codec layers is a
problem, then it's not a BUNDLE problem - it's a generic multiplexing
problem.)

Thanks!

Regards,

Christer
_______________________________________________
rtcweb mailing list
rtcweb@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rtcweb

Received on Wednesday, 29 August 2012 19:07:45 UTC