2011/10/26 Miguel Angel Ortu?o <miguelangel at yuilop.com>: > Then you mean, for instance, that if an endpoint A offers a payload of type > iLBC/16000/1 with an id value of 102 and an endpoint B responds offering the > same payload but with an id of 109 this should be considered as a violation? No, this is legal, although not recommended by RFC 3264. I thought you meant an offer of ilbc/8000 with PT=102 which is answered with the same PT=102 but different name, e.g. speex/8000. The latter is illegal. > There's no way possible of establishing an id equivalence or translation > between both endpoints? As far as i know iLBC has a dynamic payload type and > there should exist some kind of mechanism to set a bridge between ids. Isn't > right? Thanks. > That's correct. For dynamic PT it's the name that matters, and pjmedia should be able to handle it correctly. Cheers Benny
