W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-webrtc@w3.org > October 2013

Re: "SDP"

From: Adam Roach <adam@nostrum.com>
Date: Sun, 20 Oct 2013 21:41:06 -0500
Message-ID: <52649442.5060004@nostrum.com>
To: Silvia Pfeiffer <silviapfeiffer1@gmail.com>
CC: "public-webrtc@w3.org" <public-webrtc@w3.org>
On 10/20/13 19:44, Silvia Pfeiffer wrote:
> Picking up on this old thread: are we anywhere near moving from
> rfc3264 to rfc4566 for SDP yet?

You are confused. RFC 3264 does not define SDP syntax. It only defines 
the offer/answer model. Nothing has replaced RFC 3264 yet.

SDP was first defined in RFC 2327, and updated in RFC 4566. The rather 
meager changes between those two specifications are laid out in section 
10 of RFC 4566. For the purpose of the kinds of things you are likely to 
be worried about, the only substantive change in grammar is that RFC 
4566 made it okay to omit both "e=" and "p=" at the same time.

In particular, the ordering of "t=" versus "b=" and "s=" is identical 
among all the RFCs ever published. It has never changed.

> For example, Chrome creates and expects the "t=" line right after the
> "s=" line and if you change the order to the one prescribed in rfc4566
> (i.e. move the "t=" line after the "b=" line), you get the following
> error...

If what you say is accurate, then you've simply found a bug in Chrome. 
This is not a spec problem, it is an issue with a specific 
implementation. You can discuss it here:


...and search for and/or file a bug here:


Received on Monday, 21 October 2013 02:41:41 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 19:17:51 UTC