[Technical Errata Reported] RFC5939 (5042)

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
3 messages Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

[Technical Errata Reported] RFC5939 (5042)

rfc-editor
The following errata report has been submitted for RFC5939,
"Session Description Protocol (SDP) Capability Negotiation".

--------------------------------------
You may review the report below and at:
http://www.rfc-editor.org/errata/eid5042

--------------------------------------
Type: Technical
Reported by: Typo in example <[hidden email]>

Section: 4.2

Original Text
-------------
m=audio 59000 UDP/TLS/RTP/AVP 98

Corrected Text
--------------
m=audio 59000 UDP/TLS/RTP/SAVP 98

Notes
-----
The example missed an S in the mine type. The list of allowed types is at https://www.iana.org/assignments/sdp-parameters/sdp-parameters.xhtml#sdp-parameters-2 and UDP/TLS/RTP/AVP  is not a registered device. Because this is over TLS, it is a SRTP (not RTP) and should use SAVP not AVP.

Instructions:
-------------
This erratum is currently posted as "Reported". If necessary, please
use "Reply All" to discuss whether it should be verified or
rejected. When a decision is reached, the verifying party  
can log in to change the status and edit the report, if necessary.

--------------------------------------
RFC5939 (draft-ietf-mmusic-sdp-capability-negotiation-13)
--------------------------------------
Title               : Session Description Protocol (SDP) Capability Negotiation
Publication Date    : September 2010
Author(s)           : F. Andreasen
Category            : PROPOSED STANDARD
Source              : Multiparty Multimedia Session Control RAI
Area                : Real-time Applications and Infrastructure
Stream              : IETF
Verifying Party     : IESG

_______________________________________________
mmusic mailing list
[hidden email]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mmusic
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Fwd: [Technical Errata Reported] RFC5939 (5042)

Ben Campbell-3
Hi,

This seems correct to me on a quick scan, modulo the work around opportunistic srtp, which shouldn’t affect the erratum at this point. Thoughts?

Thanks!

Ben.

Begin forwarded message:

From: RFC Errata System <[hidden email]>
Subject: [Technical Errata Reported] RFC5939 (5042)
Date: June 16, 2017 at 11:05:54 AM CDT

The following errata report has been submitted for RFC5939,
"Session Description Protocol (SDP) Capability Negotiation".

--------------------------------------
You may review the report below and at:
http://www.rfc-editor.org/errata/eid5042

--------------------------------------
Type: Technical
Reported by: Typo in example <[hidden email]>

Section: 4.2

Original Text
-------------
m=audio 59000 UDP/TLS/RTP/AVP 98

Corrected Text
--------------
m=audio 59000 UDP/TLS/RTP/SAVP 98

Notes
-----
The example missed an S in the mine type. The list of allowed types is at https://www.iana.org/assignments/sdp-parameters/sdp-parameters.xhtml#sdp-parameters-2 and UDP/TLS/RTP/AVP  is not a registered device. Because this is over TLS, it is a SRTP (not RTP) and should use SAVP not AVP.

Instructions:
-------------
This erratum is currently posted as "Reported". If necessary, please
use "Reply All" to discuss whether it should be verified or
rejected. When a decision is reached, the verifying party  
can log in to change the status and edit the report, if necessary.

--------------------------------------
RFC5939 (draft-ietf-mmusic-sdp-capability-negotiation-13)
--------------------------------------
Title               : Session Description Protocol (SDP) Capability Negotiation
Publication Date    : September 2010
Author(s)           : F. Andreasen
Category            : PROPOSED STANDARD
Source              : Multiparty Multimedia Session Control RAI
Area                : Real-time Applications and Infrastructure
Stream              : IETF
Verifying Party     : IESG


_______________________________________________
mmusic mailing list
[hidden email]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mmusic
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Technical Errata Reported] RFC5939 (5042)

Cullen Jennings-2
In reply to this post by rfc-editor

> On Jun 16, 2017, at 10:05 AM, RFC Errata System <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> The following errata report has been submitted for RFC5939,
> "Session Description Protocol (SDP) Capability Negotiation".
>
> --------------------------------------
> You may review the report below and at:
> http://www.rfc-editor.org/errata/eid5042
>
> --------------------------------------
> Type: Technical
> Reported by: Typo in example <[hidden email]>
>
> Section: 4.2
>
> Original Text
> -------------
> m=audio 59000 UDP/TLS/RTP/AVP 98
>
> Corrected Text
> --------------
> m=audio 59000 UDP/TLS/RTP/SAVP 98
>
> Notes
> -----
> The example missed an S in the mine type. The list of allowed types is at https://www.iana.org/assignments/sdp-parameters/sdp-parameters.xhtml#sdp-parameters-2 and UDP/TLS/RTP/AVP  is not a registered device. Because this is over TLS, it is a SRTP (not RTP) and should use SAVP not AVP.
>
>

I have no idea how I cut and paste in mine type there. I should have put "proto" not "mine type". Sorry


_______________________________________________
mmusic mailing list
[hidden email]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mmusic