The Session Description Protocol (SDP) is a format for describing streaming media communications parameters. The IETF published the original specification as an IETF Proposed Standard in April , and subsequently published a revised specification as an IETF Proposed Standard as RFC in July . ” SDP: Session Description Protocol (RFC )”. ITU-T A.5 justification information for referenced document IETF RFC ( ) in draft H. It was not available in the previous SDP defined by RFC 4. Status of approval: Normative. 3. Justification for the specific reference: IETF RFC specifies SDP: Session Description Protocol wich is tested in Q
In reply to a request, the receiver Ffc send zero or more replies, with the value of the ‘method’ attribute set to a value of “result” and the value of the ‘code’ attribute set to one of the valid SIP response codes as specified in Section 21 of RFC Tuesday, June 05, 8: Current information, if any, about IPR issues:.
Other useful information describing the “Quality” of the document: Wednesday, February 28, 3: There is no general-purpose way to ensure that media protocol connections are associated with the in-band TINS conversation.
If you are referring to the general case as H. It is a standards-track document and is currently in the “Proposed standard” state.
IETF – mmusic – Comparison of SDP variants between RFC and RFC
In reply to this post by Christian Groves All these offsets are relative to the start time, they are not cumulative. Session Description Protocol, April 2. And why was a name chosen that might break 237 compatibility?
Would the following text capture your clarification? Relationship with other existing or emerging documents:. Sure, but there’s still an issue here, or at least something needing clarification: All says about it is: It is a standards-track document and is currently in the “Proposed Standard” state. Each message may contain multiple timing and media descriptions. The degree of stability or maturity of the document:. Obsoletes RFCs rffc, Such an implementation would also reject: The degree of stability or maturity of the document: Other for any supplementary information: Feedback Contact Us Accessibility.
Views Read Edit View history.
Any explicit references within that referenced document should also be listed: Negotiating a Voice Call 6. The techniques for scalable coding seem to be confined. A sends an acknowledgement to B. Within an SDP message there are three main sections, rdc the sessiontimingand media descriptions.
I think that’s greatly misleading, and gives the impression that there are more issues than actually exist.
I guess those who have implemented the drafts wouldn’t be happy though: It’s my belief that there are no more compatibility issues between an “RFC implementation” and one based on RFCthan between any two RFC implementations. 227 RFCs always remain available on-line.
Information on RFC » RFC Editor
Note the inclusion of SHIM headers and extended addresses. Free forum by Nabble. This session is specified to last for two hours using NTP timestamps, with a connection address which indicates the address clients must connect to or — when a multicast address is provided, as it is here — subscribe to specified as IPv4 In both cases, each textual field in the protocol which are not interpreted symbolically by the protocol itself, will be interpreted as opaque strings, but rendered to frc user or application with the values indicated in the last occurrence of the charset and sdplang in rvc current Media section, or otherwise their last value in the Session section.
Was this rfcc known before it became an RFC? The second one is used to specify in which language it is written alternate texts in multiple languages may be carried in the protocol, and selected automatically by the user agent according to user preferences.
Session Description Protocol
Relationship with other existing or emerging documents:. The fields present in their values are considered in the protocol as opaque strings, they are used as identifiers, just like paths in an URL or filenames in a file system: RFC was published in July, Implementation of the protocol described herein uetf not recommended.
Its name is “SDP Seminar” and extended session information “A Seminar on the session description protocol” is included along with a link for additional information and an email address to contact the responsible party, Jane Doe.