Subject: Re: RFC 2833 on Tones

From: Colin Perkins <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 01 Jun 2000 10:38:04 +0100

--> Dan Wing writes:
>On Wed, 31 May 2000 10:43 -0700, Rex Coldren wrote:
>> When used with RFC 2198, the number of redundant encodings also has an
>> impact on the total bandwidth used.
>
>I think the duplication has merit, but appropriate text is required
>explaining when such RFC2198 duplication of DTMF tones isn't appropriate.
>
>Perhaps a simple MAY is good enough, but only if we assume implementors
>will understand why it's a MAY instead of SHOULD or MUST.  I haven't read
>RFC2198 in awhile, but it may have text which explains some of the
>drawbacks of arbitrary duplication of packets in a bandwidth-constrained
>or policed network.  My quick skim of RFC2198 didn't turn up such text,
>however.

It's briefly mentioned in the security considerations section, but could
probably do with expanding. I'm maintaining an errata list for this, for
when we revise the RFC, if you have any appropriate words I can add them.

Colin

---

From: "Wilson C. Chung" <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 1 Jun 2000 19:54:05 -0700

Is there any implementation of RTP encapsulation of MPEG1/2 streams?

Tx, Wilson C. Chung, VMLabs

---

From: [email-masked] (Jeremy Hall)
Date: Mon, 5 Jun 2000 05:46:14 -0400 (EDT)

Lame has an mp3rtp program that encodes it.  There are various decoders
out there that are supposed to work with other programs.  Unfortunately,
the only one I am aware of for UNIX is a propriatory version that does not
coe in source form.

_J