Subject: [MMUSIC] comments on draft-ietf-mmusic-sdp-bfcp-01.txt

From: "Even, Roni" <[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, 29 May 2005 16:49:40 +0300

Hi,

I have some concerns about the offer answer model usage for defining the
floor control server.

1. Assume we have a point to point call between two endpoints, EPA and
EPB. EPA offers a BFCP m line with confide and userid attributes
suggesting to become the BFCP server for a specific media. Now EPB wants
to be the floor control server for that media and to reject the offer.
Does it reject the m line with port 0 and offers a new BFCP m line. Is
there some way to break such tie if both sides want to be the BFCP
server.

2. In the above case does EPB need to keep the floor-id defined in the
offer from EPA so that the media line will have the same labels.

3. Now suppose that EPB is the current floor server. And EPA wants to
become the floor control server. The questions are as in 1 and 2. An
example for such a case is if EPA is also an MCU and another party, EPC,
called EPA and now it's a three way where EPA is the MCU and EPB and EPC
are connected to it. It is logical in this case to have the floor
control server on EPA.

Thanks

Roni

*****************************************************

Roni Even

VP Product Planning

Polycom NSD

Tel: +972-3-9251200

Mobile: +972-54-5481099

Fax: +972-3-9211571

Email: [email-masked]

_______________________________________________
mmusic mailing list
[email-masked]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mmusic