Date: Fri, 01 Jul 2005 17:38:19 +0200
From: Magnus Westerlund <magnus.westerlund@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Message-ID: <42C5636B.7090208@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
I understand everything you're saying, except this part...
| I do want to point out that how we RTP uses the top-part of the media
| type name. They are used to explicitly identify which other media
| formats they are okay to multiplex in the same session.
OK, that part too...
| This also
| ensures that different media types are not multiplexed on the same RTP
| session.
And that...
| The reason for this practice can be read in secton 5.2 of RFC 3550.
OK.
| Thus we need to be able to register RTP payload formats also in
| text top-level type.
Now, I'm lost. You just finished explaining how the RTP media types are
all different from all other media types, because they necessarily need to
retain the RTP packet info (or I'd guess perhaps some of that, but it
doesn't matter) as an essential part of a data. Now you seem to be
saying that it is OK to multiplex a text/plain or a text/html into the
same data stream. How? Those don't contain the RTP packet info, do they?
Or is this just because you have some text/x types already, and want to
be able to add new ones to the same set? If that's it, would it be possible
to rename the existing text/* (RTP) types into something else, like rtp-text/*
so that the confusion goes away?
kre
_______________________________________________
Ietf@xxxxxxxx
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf