[Standards] Jingle: one RTP application type to bind them all?

Paul Witty paulrw at codian.com
Fri May 30 14:57:02 UTC 2008


Peter Saint-Andre wrote:
> Back in April, Olivier Crête questioned whether we really need separate
> application types for RTP audio (XEP-0167) and RFC video (XEP-0180):
>
> http://mail.jabber.org/pipermail/standards/2008-April/018554.html
>
> Olivier suggested that we could simply negotiate one RTP "channel" and
> use it for anything that RTP can do -- voice, video, real-time text (RFC
> 4103), etc. I have not seen a lot of enthusiasm for this idea, but I
> would like to make sure that we have consensus on keeping things as-is
> before moving forward with the Jingle specs. If you have feedback on
> this issue, please weigh in on the standards at xmpp.org list.
>   

I'm in favour of simplifying things down so that there's as much in 
common between audio/video channels as possible.  Though the use of the 
word "one" in the above paragraph seems to suggest a single RTP channel, 
implying all media being received on a single UDP port.  This would be a 
bad idea at least where doing Jingle <-> SIP gateways is concerned, as 
SIP uses separate UDP streams for each content type, so the gateway 
would have to inspect each packet incoming on the Jingle side to 
determine the payload type to send it out on the correct port.

I'll have a read through all the updated specs over the weekend, and try 
to comment on them on Monday.

-- 

Paul



More information about the Standards mailing list