Would adding a statement like this at the end of 3.1.2 address your concern:
Exceptions for other network types, such as for the "ATM"
network type defined in [RFC3108], require additional specifications.
Regards,
Simo
From: ext Roni Even [mailto:ron(_dot_)even(_dot_)tlv(_at_)gmail(_dot_)com]
Sent: 4. kesäkuuta 2013 2:26
To: Veikkolainen Simo (Nokia-CTO/Espoo);
draft-ietf-mmusic-sdp-miscellaneous-caps(_dot_)all(_at_)tools(_dot_)ietf(_dot_)org
Cc: ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org; gen-art(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
Subject: RE: Gen-ART LC review of draft-ietf-mmusic-sdp-miscellaneous-caps-05
Hi Simo,
For the PSTN case the document explain how to construct the m-line PSTN is used
based on the ccap using port 9. This is not specified for the ATM case. So if
it is not mentioned it should be clear that using ccap for ATM is not
specified and need another document
Roni
From:
Simo(_dot_)Veikkolainen(_at_)nokia(_dot_)com<mailto:Simo(_dot_)Veikkolainen(_at_)nokia(_dot_)com>
[mailto:Simo(_dot_)Veikkolainen(_at_)nokia(_dot_)com]
Sent: 31 May, 2013 1:14 PM
To:
ron(_dot_)even(_dot_)tlv(_at_)gmail(_dot_)com<mailto:ron(_dot_)even(_dot_)tlv(_at_)gmail(_dot_)com>;
draft-ietf-mmusic-sdp-miscellaneous-caps(_dot_)all(_at_)tools(_dot_)ietf(_dot_)org<mailto:draft-ietf-mmusic-sdp-miscellaneous-caps(_dot_)all(_at_)tools(_dot_)ietf(_dot_)org>
Cc: ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org<mailto:ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org>;
gen-art(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org<mailto:gen-art(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org>
Subject: RE: Gen-ART LC review of draft-ietf-mmusic-sdp-miscellaneous-caps-05
Hello Roni,
Please see my answer below prefixed with [SV].
From: ext Roni Even [mailto:ron(_dot_)even(_dot_)tlv(_at_)gmail(_dot_)com]
Sent: 29. toukokuuta 2013 21:13
To:
draft-ietf-mmusic-sdp-miscellaneous-caps(_dot_)all(_at_)tools(_dot_)ietf(_dot_)org<mailto:draft-ietf-mmusic-sdp-miscellaneous-caps(_dot_)all(_at_)tools(_dot_)ietf(_dot_)org>
Cc: ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org<mailto:ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org>;
gen-art(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org<mailto:gen-art(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org>
Subject: Gen-ART LC review of draft-ietf-mmusic-sdp-miscellaneous-caps-05
I am the assigned Gen-ART reviewer for this draft. For background on Gen-ART,
please see the FAQ at <http://wiki.tools.ietf.org/area/gen/trac/wiki/GenArtfaq>.
Please resolve these comments along with any other Last Call comments you may
receive.
Document: draft-ietf-mmusic-sdp-miscellaneous-caps-05
Reviewer: Roni Even
Review Date:2013-5-29
IETF LC End Date: 2013-6-4
IESG Telechat date:
Summary: This draft is almost ready for publication as Standard track RFC.
Major issues:
Minor issues:
1. I can understand from the draft that when you have IP and PSTN nettype
it is requires that the ccap will be for the PSTN. What happens if you want to
have the ccap nettype as ATM to be used with IP in the c=
[SV] If either endpoint does not support ATM, the "c=" line with the ATM
address would not get used (either it is not offered, or the Answerer removes
that from the SDP configurations). In case both endpoints actually support and
want to use ATM as alternative to IP based bearer, the conventions in RFC3108
would need to be followed when crafting the SDP configurations. That said, I
haven't taken a detailed look at RFC3108 to see if the ATM based media can be
negotiated using the SDP Capability Negotiation framework and its current
extensions.
Simo
Nits/editorial comments: