headers
Internet-Drafts | 1 Oct 2004 21:51
Picon
Favicon

I-D ACTION:draft-ietf-mmusic-connection-precon-00.txt

A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts directories.
This draft is a work item of the Multiparty Multimedia Session Control Working Group of the IETF.

	Title		: Connection-Establishment Preconditions in the 
			  Session Initiation Protocol (SIP)
	Author(s)	: G. Camarillo
	Filename	: draft-ietf-mmusic-connection-precon-00.txt
	Pages		: 8
	Date		: 2004-10-1
	
This document defines the connection-establishment precondition type
   for the SIP preconditions framework. Connection-establishment
   preconditions are met when a transport connection (e.g., a TCP
   connection) is successfully established between two endpoints.

A URL for this Internet-Draft is:
http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-mmusic-connection-precon-00.txt

To remove yourself from the I-D Announcement list, send a message to 
i-d-announce-request <at> ietf.org with the word unsubscribe in the body of the message.  
You can also visit https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/I-D-announce 
to change your subscription settings.

Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP. Login with the username
"anonymous" and a password of your e-mail address. After logging in,
type "cd internet-drafts" and then
	"get draft-ietf-mmusic-connection-precon-00.txt".

A list of Internet-Drafts directories can be found in
http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html
(Continue reading)

Permalink | Reply | 0 comments |
headers
Colin Perkins | 3 Oct 2004 18:20

Re: I-D ACTION:draft-ietf-mmusic-sdp-new-20.txt

I'm not sure I understand your question. For a layered encoding, "b=AS" 
would specify the bandwidth of the entire layered stream.

Colin

On 29 Sep 2004, at 11:25, sunil bhargo wrote:

> Hi,
>          If the presentation is encoded into number of
> streams(MBR) one expects to see equivalent number of
> m= sections if that is so then how can multiple
> streams refer to the same m= section as implied below
> :-
>
>       "For applications where hierarchically encoded
> streams are being sent to a unicast address, it may be
> necessary to specify multiple transport ports.  This
> is done using a similar notation to that used for IP
> multicast addresses in the "c=" field:
> m=<media> <port>/<number of ports> <transport> <fmt
> list>
>       In such a case, the ports used depend on the
> transport protocol.For RTP, the default is that only
> the even numbered ports are used for data with the
> corresponding one-higher odd ports used for the RTCP
> belonging to the RTP session, and the <number of
> ports>
> denoting the number of RTP sessions.  For example:
>           m=video 49170/2 RTP/AVP 31 "
>
(Continue reading)

Permalink | Reply | 0 comments |
headers
Colin Perkins | 3 Oct 2004 18:16

Re: I-D ACTION:draft-ietf-mmusic-sdp-new-20.txt

Hi,

On 27 Sep 2004, at 13:18, sunil bhargo wrote:
>     Doubts regarding the following sections :-
>
> 1.
> "an SDP parser MUST completely ignore any session
> description that contains a type letter that it does
> not understand"
>
>        Isn't the word MUST having very strong
> implications which might not be necessary. For example
> intermediate SDP parsers between the client and server
> if everything that is not understood is rejected then
> it might be problem. First thing that comes to mind
> are the proxies(caching or dumb) they would have to
> deny the service instead of proxying the presentation.

True.

>      But somewhere else we mention as well
> "An SDP parser MUST ignore any attribute it doesn't
> understand."
>      So do we mean to say that any type other than
> attribute if not understood then deny service or do we
> mean something else.

Correct. SDP is extended via attributes and it's likely that an 
attribute is not understood (and therefore ignored). New type letters 
are rarely if ever defined (none have been defined to date), so the
(Continue reading)

Permalink | Reply | 0 comments |
headers
Colin Perkins | 3 Oct 2004 18:11

Re: Re: draft-ietf-mmusic-sdp-new-20

On 27 Sep 2004, at 11:59, sunil bhargo wrote:
>     in the following paragraph for the unicast IP
> sessions :-
> 1. In section 4.1 it is mentioned for unicast sessions
>
> "The semantics of this address and port depend on the
> media and transport protocol defined.  By default,
> this SHOULD be the remote address and remote port to
> which data is sent."
>
>     but how can the sender identify which port the
> receiver is ready to ready to receive the data on.

An offer/answer exchange, or some similar means, outside the scope of 
SDP.

> 2. also in section 5 it is mentioned that
>
>   " An SDP session description consists of a
> session-level section followed by zero or more
> media-level sections. "
>        this implies that the m= line is OPTIONAL.
>       but then in the same section where the
> differentiation of REQUIRED and OPTIONAL fields is
> given
> Media description
>          m=  (media name and transport address)
>   m= does not contain the '*" field  which means it is
> essential but this contradicts the earlier statement.
(Continue reading)

Permalink | Reply | 0 comments |
headers
Colin Perkins | 3 Oct 2004 10:47

Internet Draft deadlines for IETF 61

The deadlines for internet-draft submissions for the 61st IETF meeting 
in Washington DC are as follows:

  11 October	Pre-approval deadline for new working group drafts
  18 October	Submission deadline for new working group drafts
  25 October	Submission deadline for other drafts

The deadline is at 9:00am US Eastern time on the date specified.

Note the initial pre-approval deadline: if you are intending to submit 
a new working group draft (i.e. filename draft-ietf-mmusic-...-00.txt) 
you MUST contact the chairs to seek approval, in sufficient time that 
we can read the draft and send approval before 11th October.

--

-- 
Colin Perkins
http://csperkins.org/
Permalink | Reply | 1 comment |
headers
Hedayat, Kaynam | 5 Oct 2004 20:26

New internet draft on media loopback

I would like to bring the attention of the group to a new internet draft on
media loopback capability in SIP sessions. The draft can be found at
http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-hedayat-media-loopback-00.txt

Regards,
Kaynam

-----------------------------------------
Kaynam Hedayat
Chief Technology Officer
Brix Networks
285 Mill Road
Chelmsford, MA 01824

tel.   978.367.5611
fax.   978.367.5700
khedayat <at> brixnet.com
www.brixnet.com

See it before they hear it: Test the performance and quality of your VoIP at
www.TestYourVoip.com
Permalink | Reply | 0 comments |
headers
Holger Karl | 6 Oct 2004 15:06
Picon

Call for Papers: WiOpt '05

Dear Colleagues,

Please note that the deadline for WiOpt'05 has been

              EXTENDED UNTIL October 10!

The web site http://www.wiopt.org has full details.

Our apologies for duplicate copies of this call.

Best regards

Holger Karl
(on behalf of the Wiopt'05 organizers)

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

   The 3rd International Symposium on Modeling and Optimization in
         Mobile, Ad Hoc, and Wireless Networks (WiOpt'05)

         Riva del Garda, Trentino, Italy, April 3-7, 2005

                   http://www.wiopt.org

SCOPE OF THE SYMPOSIUM
----------------------

The complexity of mobile, ad hoc, and wireless networks requires thoroughly
founded models capturing their essential characteristics and new
optimization techniques building upon such models. Insights into both the
(Continue reading)

Permalink | Reply | 0 comments |
headers
Peter | 7 Oct 2004 15:49
Picon

WiMAX Summit: Call for proposal

• What is the business model for WiMAX?
• What do we learn from earlier deployments?
• What about the future extensions of the standard?
• How is addressed the interoperability challenge?

These questions, among others, will be addressed during the WiMAX Summit to be held in Paris next 5-8 April, 2005.

A call for papers has been launched online, effective until October 29.

 

Get all details at:

http://www.upperside.fr/wimax05/wimax2005intro.htm

 

 

_______________________________________________
mmusic mailing list
mmusic <at> ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mmusic
Permalink | Reply | 0 comments |
headers
Yali Wang | 9 Oct 2004 22:57
Favicon

strange thing about attached text file (fwd)

To Whom It May Concern:

COuld you please help me?

In my own screen, the text file of internet draft shows very
neatly, at the top or the end of each page, I put the page remarking
lines.

But once after attached text file by email, then re-download and
re-open it, it changes to messed-up lines, and looks very ugly.
No matter how I modify the original,which in fact looks very good,
as long as attached by email, then the the lines text file look ugly.

Furthermore, I have the figure in the file. After attached, the figure
always disppear.

How should I solve this problem ? I used the Microsoft word 2000 for editing.

Thanks.

yali

_______________________________________________
XCON mailing list
XCON <at> ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/xcon
Permalink | Reply | 0 comments |
headers
Colin Perkins | 11 Oct 2004 12:10

Re: Internet Draft deadlines for IETF 61

Reminder: the internet-draft submission deadline for -00 drafts is one 
week from today.

Colin

On 3 Oct 2004, at 09:47, Colin Perkins wrote:
> The deadlines for internet-draft submissions for the 61st IETF meeting 
> in Washington DC are as follows:
>
>  11 October	Pre-approval deadline for new working group drafts
>  18 October	Submission deadline for new working group drafts
>  25 October	Submission deadline for other drafts
>
> The deadline is at 9:00am US Eastern time on the date specified.
>
> Note the initial pre-approval deadline: if you are intending to submit 
> a new working group draft (i.e. filename draft-ietf-mmusic-...-00.txt) 
> you MUST contact the chairs to seek approval, in sufficient time that 
> we can read the draft and send approval before 11th October.
>
> -- 
> Colin Perkins
> http://csperkins.org/
Permalink | Reply | 0 comments |

Gmane