Glenn Parsons (gparsons@nortelnetworks.com)
Tue, 13 Mar 2001 09:32:17 -0500
Hi,
Is there any interest in aligning the G.726 MIME content-type between email
and RTP? That is, do we need both audio/32kadpcm and audio/g726-32 ? I
would think that if they are both essentially the same, there is no need to
have two.
In RFC2422, we have defined 32kb/s G.726 for use with the VPIM spec (RFC
2421) for transmitting voice messages via email. We are in the process of
moving this to Draft Standard (see draft-ietf-vpim-vpimv2r2-32k-00.txt)
I believe we have defined the packing order the same (although with
different wording :-) but we have not used the other data rates. Perhaps
you would prefer all the G.726 MIME content-types to follow the same style?
Cheers,
Glenn Parsons
VPIM WG co-chair
> ----------
> From: Stephen Casner
> Sent: Friday, March 9, 2001 3:15 am
> To: rem-conf@es.net
> Subject: AVT WG last call on RTP spec and profile
>
> To the AVT working group:
>
> This message is to announce the repeat WG last call on the RTP spec
> and A/V profile to end in two weeks at the IETF meeting in
> Minneapolis. These drafts are to go to Draft Standard RFC status.
>
> Note that we already completed a WG last call on these drafts a year
> ago, but we've had some trouble completing the interoperability
> matrix. A new last call is being issued because SOME ITEMS HAVE BEEN
> DELETED and because there has some additional text has been added on
> congestion control in response to the discussions at the last two
> meetings.
>
> Please review these changes, and also please take this opportunity to
> check that problems you have told me about before have been
> addressed. If I missed some, please tell me again.
>
> The drafts should appear on the official Internet Drafts repositories
> soon, but in the meantime you can fetch them at the URLs below.
>
> Changes to the RTP spec:
>
> The only changes in this revision of the draft from the previous
> one were the addition of a reference to RFC 2914 in Section 10 on
> congestion control and a clarification of splitting RTCP between
> encrypted and unencrypted packets in Section 9.
>
> There are a few items in the main RTP spec still not completed in
> the interop matrix, but we have commitments for each to be done by
> the meeting or shortly thereafter.
>
> Changes to the A/V profile:
>
> o An paragraph further explaining the requirements for congestion
> control was added to Section 2. *** We agreed to leave the
> text mostly as is, which I have done, but I've attempted to
> address Reha Civanlar's argument that we need to specify a
> timescale, and I tried to reflect Sally Floyd's comments
> about the nature of the TCP fairness criterion.
>
> o Packetization of G.726 audio at rates 40, 24 and 16 kb/s is
> specified in addition to 32 kb/s, because those have been
> waiting for an implementation and now we have two.
>
> o The mapping of a user pass-phrase string into an encryption key
> was deleted from Section 2 because two interoperable
> implementations were not found.
>
> o The specification of a two-byte encapsulation for RTP over TCP
> was deleted because two interoperable implementations were not
> found.
>
> o The audio payload formats 1016, G723, GSM-HR and GSM-EFR were
> removed because two interoperable implementations were not
> found.
>
> o The video payload formats H263, BT656, MP2T, MP1S, MP2P and
> BMPEG were removed because two interoperable implementations
> were not found.
>
> In addition to the RTP spec and profile, the RTP MIME registration
> draft was also updated to bring the H263-2000 parameter definitions in
> line with recent ITU changes. This draft and the SDP Bandwidth
> Modifiers for RTCP Bandwidth draft are to go to Proposed Standard.
>
> The package of drafts is available at:
>
> ftp://ftp.packetdesign.com/outgoing/casner/draft-ietf-avt-rtp-new-09.txt
> ftp://ftp.packetdesign.com/outgoing/casner/draft-ietf-avt-rtp-new-09.ps
>
> ftp://ftp.packetdesign.com/outgoing/casner/draft-ietf-avt-profile-new-10.t
> xt
> ftp://ftp.packetdesign.com/outgoing/casner/draft-ietf-avt-profile-new-10.p
> s
>
> ftp://ftp.packetdesign.com/outgoing/casner/draft-ietf-avt-rtp-mime-04.txt
>
> ftp://ftp.packetdesign.com/outgoing/casner/draft-ietf-avt-rtcp-bw-03.txt
>
> Thanks in advance for your help in reviewing these drafts.
>
> -- Steve Casner
> AVT Co-Chair
>
>
>
>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.0b3 on Tue Mar 13 2001 - 16:35:05 IST