Subject: Re: [AVTCORE] IANAs payload type number registry and RFC 5761

From: Kevin Gross <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 25 Feb 2014 20:03:38 -0700

On Thu, Jan 23, 2014 at 8:19 AM, Magnus Westerlund <
[email-masked]> wrote:

> 2. The "Reserved for RTCP conflict avoidance" in this table is not up to
> date. Instead
>
> http://www.iana.org/assignments/rtp-parameters/rtp-parameters.xhtml#rtp-parameters-4
> provides the list of the RTCP types that has actually been registered.
> Subtract 128 from the RTCP Packet Type value to find the corresponding
> PT value with collision risk. For further information see RFC 3551 and
> RFC 5761.
>
> The critical reference here seems to be RFC 5761 section 4. I'm not sure
why calling out RFC 3551 is necessary.

Updating the not attached to the registry looks like the right approach to
me. Thanks Magnus for summarizing this and putting together a proposal.

---

From: Magnus Westerlund <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 26 Feb 2014 08:59:28 +0100

On 2014-02-26 04:03, Kevin Gross wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 23, 2014 at 8:19 AM, Magnus Westerlund
> <[email-masked] <mailto:[email-masked]>>
> wrote:
> 

Yes, in this case for RTCP conflict avoidance RFC 5761 is the applicable
reference.

However, for the third bullet the inclusion of RFC 3551 is relevant as
that applies when the RTP/RTCP multiplexing is not used.

> 
> Updating the not attached to the registry looks like the right approach
> to me. Thanks Magnus for summarizing this and putting together a proposal.
> 

As I understand the WG are acceptable to this approach. I will take the
opportunity to try to get this in place with IANA during the coming week.

Cheers

Magnus Westerlund

----------------------------------------------------------------------
Services, Media and Network features, Ericsson Research EAB/TXM
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Ericsson AB                 | Phone  +46 10 7148287
Färögatan 6                 | Mobile +46 73 0949079
SE-164 80 Stockholm, Sweden | mailto: [email-masked]
----------------------------------------------------------------------

---

From: Kevin Gross <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 26 Feb 2014 08:21:17 -0700

> that applies when the RTP/RTCP multiplexing is not used.

Yes, the third bullet does call out RFC 3551 (section 3). I don't think a
RFC 3551 reference is necessary in bullet 2.

> I'd be happy to help draft or review a drafted note.