Subject: [MMUSIC] Rtspspec-bugs digest, Vol 1 #24 - 4 msgs

From: [email-masked]
Date: Sat, 23 Feb 2002 12:25:34 -0800

This is an automatic digest of bugs submitted and changed on the RTSP bug tracker.  To see a list of bugs, visit:

http://sf.net/projects/rtspspec

When replying, please make your Subject line more specific than "Re: Rtspspec-bugs digest"

Today's Topics:

   1. [ rtspspec-Bugs-477407 ] Transport BNF, ; and unclearities ([email-masked])
   2. [ rtspspec-Bugs-477413 ] Transport BNF: mode ([email-masked])
   3. [ rtspspec-Bugs-477416 ] BNF error section 3.6 NPT ([email-masked])
   4. [ rtspspec-Bugs-477421 ] When to send response ([email-masked])

--__--__--

Message: 1
To: [email-masked]
From: [email-masked]
Date: Thu, 21 Feb 2002 16:44:32 -0800
Subject: [rtspspec-bugs] [ rtspspec-Bugs-477407 ] Transport BNF, ; and unclearities

Bugs item #477407, was opened at 2001-11-01 23:26
You can respond by visiting: 
http://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=377744&aid=477407&group_id=23194

Category: None
>Group: Fixed in CVS/Need WG Approval
Status: Open
Resolution: None
Priority: 5
Submitted By: Magnus Westerlund (magwes)
Assigned to: Nobody/Anonymous (nobody)
Summary: Transport BNF, ; and unclearities

Initial Comment:
Page 61, Transport BNF: Should not multicast/unicast be proceeded by a ";"? Is multiple entries of 
the same type allowed? Are there any requirement on having multicast/unicast first?

----------------------------------------------------------------------

>Comment By: Rob Lanphier (robla)
Date: 2002-02-21 16:44

Message:
Logged In: YES 
user_id=3796

Language inserted:
"A transport-spec transport option may only contain one of
any given parameter within it.  Parameters may be given in
any order.  Additionally, it may only contain the unicast or
multicast transport parameter."

Example has been fleshed out as follows:

"Below is a usage example, showing a client advertising the
capability to handle multicast or unicast, preferring
multicast.  Since this is a unicast-only stream, the server
responds with the proper transport parameters for unicast.

  C->S: SETUP rtsp://example.com/foo/bar/baz.rm RTSP/1.0
        CSeq: 302
        Transport: RTP/AVP;multicast;mode="PLAY",
           RTP/AVP;unicast;client_port=3456-3457;mode="PLAY"

  S->C: RTSP/1.0 200 OK
        CSeq: 302
        Date: 23 Jan 1997 15:35:06 GMT
        Session: 47112344
        Transport: RTP/AVP;unicast;client_port=3456-3457;
            server_port=6256-6257;mode="PLAY"

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Comment By: David W. Walker (davidwwalker)
Date: 2002-01-28 16:46

Message:
Logged In: YES 
user_id=437905

RESOLUTION:

BNF will require semicolon, no mandated ordering, and 
example will be added.

Question was raised if multiple entries of the same type 
should be allowed?  This question was referred to a new 
issue.

Question was raied if interleave parameters should require 
paramters?  This question was referred to a new issue.

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Comment By: Henning Schulzrinne (hgschulz)
Date: 2002-01-09 09:59

Message:
Logged In: YES 
user_id=115926

BNF will be fixed to have semicolon. Ordering doesn't
matter. Say before header section that parameter order
doesn't matter. Also state that parameters can't be
replicated (;port=1;port=2) within the same header instance.

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Comment By: Rob Lanphier (robla)
Date: 2001-12-13 19:34

Message:
Logged In: YES 
user_id=3796

Agreed it needs fix.  We'll need to sort out the right BNF for this, in such a way that it doesn't break
backwards compatibility

----------------------------------------------------------------------

You can respond by visiting: 
http://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=377744&aid=477407&group_id=23194

--__--__--

Message: 2
To: [email-masked]
From: [email-masked]
Date: Thu, 21 Feb 2002 17:40:48 -0800
Subject: [rtspspec-bugs] [ rtspspec-Bugs-477413 ] Transport BNF: mode

Bugs item #477413, was opened at 2001-11-01 23:32
You can respond by visiting: 
http://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=377744&aid=477413&group_id=23194

Category: None
>Group: Fixed in CVS/Need WG Approval
Status: Open
Resolution: None
Priority: 5
Submitted By: Magnus Westerlund (magwes)
Assigned to: Nobody/Anonymous (nobody)
Summary: Transport BNF: mode

Initial Comment:
Transport ABNF, mode line, The "=" lacks " around it. There are also unclearities if you could 
actually have mode=""PLAY","RECORD"" ?

----------------------------------------------------------------------

>Comment By: Rob Lanphier (robla)
Date: 2002-02-21 17:40

Message:
Logged In: YES 
user_id=3796

New BNF:
parameter          = ";" ( "unicast" | "multicast" )
                ...
                   | ";" "mode" "=" mode-spec
mode-spec          =  <"> 1#mode <"> | mode
mode               =  "PLAY" | "RECORD" | token

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Comment By: Rob Lanphier (robla)
Date: 2002-01-29 18:06

Message:
Logged In: YES 
user_id=3796

RESOLVED (Jan 9 telecon: http://rtsp.org/2002/telecon/jan09.html

Rework BNF, fixing multiple problems not limited to allow outside
quotes, but not inside quotes. Quotes are optional 

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Comment By: Rob Lanphier (robla)
Date: 2001-12-13 19:45

Message:
Logged In: YES 
user_id=3796

First issue is a thinko, and just needs to be fixed.  The BNF is pretty sloppy the way that it is, and needs to 
be fixed

----------------------------------------------------------------------

You can respond by visiting: 
http://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=377744&aid=477413&group_id=23194

--__--__--

Message: 3
To: [email-masked]
From: [email-masked]
Date: Thu, 21 Feb 2002 18:06:24 -0800
Subject: [rtspspec-bugs] [ rtspspec-Bugs-477416 ] BNF error section 3.6 NPT

Bugs item #477416, was opened at 2001-11-01 23:37
You can respond by visiting: 
http://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=377744&aid=477416&group_id=23194

Category: None
>Group: Fixed in CVS/Need WG Approval
Status: Open
Resolution: None
Priority: 5
Submitted By: Magnus Westerlund (magwes)
Assigned to: Nobody/Anonymous (nobody)
Summary: BNF error section 3.6 NPT

Initial Comment:
BNF definition:npt-range, sec 3.6 lacks "npt=" in the begining of the definition. Compare with 
smpte-range or utc-range. 

----------------------------------------------------------------------

>Comment By: Rob Lanphier (robla)
Date: 2002-02-21 18:06

Message:
Logged In: YES 
user_id=3796

Fixed in CVS:
http://cvs.sourceforge.net/cgi-bin/viewcvs.cgi/rtspspec/parameters.tex.diff?r1=1.4&r2=1.5

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Comment By: David W. Walker (davidwwalker)
Date: 2002-01-28 16:49

Message:
Logged In: YES 
user_id=437905

RESOLUTION:

Require npt=, but have backwards-compatibility note in 
specificaton.

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Comment By: Rob Lanphier (robla)
Date: 2001-12-13 19:53

Message:
Logged In: YES 
user_id=3796

Hmmm...do implementors predominantly implement from the BNF, or from the numerous examples?

----------------------------------------------------------------------

You can respond by visiting: 
http://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=377744&aid=477416&group_id=23194

--__--__--

Message: 4
To: [email-masked]
From: [email-masked]
Date: Thu, 21 Feb 2002 19:00:27 -0800
Subject: [rtspspec-bugs] [ rtspspec-Bugs-477421 ] When to send response

Bugs item #477421, was opened at 2001-11-01 23:43
You can respond by visiting: 
http://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=377744&aid=477421&group_id=23194

Category: None
>Group: Fixed in CVS/Need WG Approval
Status: Open
Resolution: None
Priority: 5
Submitted By: Magnus Westerlund (magwes)
Assigned to: Nobody/Anonymous (nobody)
Summary: When to send response

Initial Comment:
Server can't respond to a bad request if no sequence number is present in the request. Resulting in 
that the client does not know that the server has received it and has issues. Please clarify when a 
server is allowed to send response to bad request.

----------------------------------------------------------------------

>Comment By: Rob Lanphier (robla)
Date: 2002-02-21 19:00

Message:
Logged In: YES 
user_id=3796

Added the following section as a new 11.3.1

11.3.1  400 Bad Request

The request could not be understood by the server due to
malformed syntax. The client SHOULD NOT repeat the request
without modifications [H10.4.1]. If the request does not
have a CSeq header, the server MUST not include a CSeq in
the response.

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Comment By: David W. Walker (davidwwalker)
Date: 2002-02-12 17:10

Message:
Logged In: YES 
user_id=437905

RESOLVED: The Server is allowed to send an immediate 
response with no sequence number. As a general rule the 
server should NOT set sequence numbers. 

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Comment By: Rob Lanphier (robla)
Date: 2001-12-13 10:01

Message:
Logged In: YES 
user_id=3796

This one is going to be up to the server.  It can send "Connection: close" if the state machine is too 
messed up (though see #492546 for another discussion).  We can't overspecify this, though.

Please suggest text to insert in the specification.

----------------------------------------------------------------------

You can respond by visiting: 
http://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=377744&aid=477421&group_id=23194

End of Rtspspec-bugs Digest

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