On Fri, 2009-08-14 at 14:41 +0800, Rockson Li (zhengyli) wrote: > I think answerer can add additional codec G729 here per sec 6.1 of > rfc3264 > > <snip> > The stream MAY indicate additional media formats, not listed in the > corresponding stream in the offer, that the answerer is willing to > send or receive > </snip> > > However, here comes the inconsistency. > > When answerer send media, it cannot send G723 packets to offerer per sec > 6.1 of RFC3264 > > <snip> > The answerer MUST send using a media format in the offer > that is also listed in the answer, > </snip> > > Whereas RFC3264 does not forbid offerer to send G729 packets to answerer > per sec 7 > > <snip> > It MUST send using a media format listed in the answer, > and it ***SHOULD*** use the first media format listed in the answer when > it > does send. > </snip>
I think you've found a mistake in the wording of the RFC. The writers assumed that if the offerer was willing to send G729, then it would have offered to do so. Clearly, the intention is that both the offerer and answerer must use only codecs that have been listed in both the offer and the answer. Dale _______________________________________________ Sip-implementors mailing list [email protected] https://lists.cs.columbia.edu/cucslists/listinfo/sip-implementors
