Re: Gen-ART review of draft-ietf-avtext-client-to-mixer-audio-level-05.txt

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



Hey Alexey,

On 27 sept. 2011, at 00:24, Alexey Melnikov <alexey.melnikov@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

Jonathan Lennox wrote:

Hi, Alexey -- thank you for the Gen-ART review.

Hi Jonathan,

Alexey Melnikov writes:

Question: are the two encoding of the audio level indication option specified in the document really necessary?
  

Do you mean the one-byte vs. two-byte forms of the header extension (Figure 1 vs. Figure 2)?  These are the two forms of the generic header extensions defined by RFC 5285.

I understood that. Does RFC 5285 require that both forms should be allowed?

It doesn't explicitly say so but it It actually does, yes. Here's what it says:

   A stream MUST contain only one-byte or two-byte
   headers: they MUST NOT be mixed within a stream.

Audio level headers can find themselves in streams that also have other, longer extensions, which do require the two-byte header. The above lines mandate that in such cases they all use the two-byte header.

In the same regard, although probably a bit less likely, nothing prevents having another sixteen header extensions in a stream that also has levels. In that case we'd need to switch to two-byte headers in order to be able to fit all the IDs.

Cheers,
Emil

--sent from my mobile

In general, it would be good to avoid multiple representations of the same thing.

The actual payload (one byte containing the V and level bits) is identical in the two cases; the only difference is the container.  We can add some text clarifying this point if you think it would be helpful.

Nits/editorial comments:
s/relys/relies ???
  
Thanks, will fix.


_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf@xxxxxxxx
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf

[Index of Archives]     [IETF Annoucements]     [IETF]     [IP Storage]     [Yosemite News]     [Linux SCTP]     [Linux Newbies]     [Fedora Users]