Thanks for the feedback - you are correct about the missing semicolon. We'll fix it in the next version.
Thanks, Alan Johnston MCI
At 11:21 AM 7/14/2003 +0200, Christer Holmberg (JO/LMF) wrote:
Hi,
I guess (hopefully) this is simply an editorial issue, and has nothing to do with the actual scenarios:
In SDP examples where you use the fmtp attribute to describe codec properties, you don't use semicolon between the specific properties.
Example from page 13:
m=audio 49170 RTP/AVP 97 a=rtpmap:97 MPA a=fmtp: 97 layer=3 bitrate=10
Shouldn't it be:
a=fmtp: 97 layer=3;bitrate=10
Now, I admit I don't know how MPA has defined the use of the fmtp attribute, but other codes using the fmtp attribute do use semicolon between the properties, so...
An example for MPEG-4 (RFC3016, page 15).
m=video 49170/2 RTP/AVP 98
a=rtpmap:98 MP4V-ES/90000
a=fmtp:98 profile-level-id=1;config=000001B001000001B5090000010000000120008440FA282C2090A21F
Regards,
Christer Holmberg Ericsson Finland
> -----Original Message----- > From: Robert Sparks [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: 11. hein�kuuta 2003 19:07 > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Cc: Alan Johnston > Subject: [Sip-implementors] SDP Offer Answer examples > > > I'd like to call attention to > > http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-mmusic-offer-an > swer-examples-01.txt > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > Abstract > > This document gives examples of Session Description Protocol (SDP) > offer answer exchanges. Examples include codec negotiation and > selection, hold and resume, and addition and deletion of media > streams. The examples show multiple media types, bidirectional, > unidirectional, inactive streams and dynamic payload types. Common > Third Party Call Control (3pcc) examples are also given. > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > > If you haven't already seen it, please look through it and let us know > if there are any other scenarios that you think need to be detailed. > > The MMUSIC working group believes this draft is close to done > and will soon move toward issuing it as an RFC. > > Thanks, > RjS > > _______________________________________________ > Sip-implementors mailing list > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > http://lists.cs.columbia.edu/mailman/listinfo/sip-implementors >
_______________________________________________ Sip-implementors mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.cs.columbia.edu/mailman/listinfo/sip-implementors
