2002-03-20IETF 53, Minneapolis Kutscher/Ott/Bormann 1 SDPng Update Dirk Jörg Carsten draft-ietf-mmusic-sdpng-04.txt.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Re-INVITE Handling draft-camarillo-sipping-reinvite-00.txt
Advertisements

On and use=document|rpc, style=literal|encoded A personal opinion Sanjiva Weerawarana IBM Research September 9-11, 2002.
Efficient XML Interchange What is it? Why is it? How does it fit in?
OASIS OData Technical Committee. AGENDA Introduction OASIS OData Technical Committee OData Overview Work of the Technical Committee Q&A.
EricssonT2#13, User Profile Description1 User Profile Description
ISO DSDL ISO – Document Schema Definition Languages (DSDL) Martin Bryan Convenor, JTC1/SC18 WG1.
July 20, 2000H.323/SIP1 Interworking Between SIP/SDP and H.323 Agenda Compare SIP/H.323 Problems in interworking Possible solutions Conclusion Q/A Kundan.
SIP Working Group Stuff Jonathan Rosenberg dynamicsoft.
Alternate Offers / Capabilities in SIP/SDP Alternate Offers / Capabilities in SIP/SDP draft-bhatia-mmusic-sdp-altcap-01.txt Authors: Medhavi Bhatia John.
An Application-led Approach for Security-related Research in Ubicomp Philip Robinson TecO, Karlsruhe University 11 May 2005.
8/2/ IETF, Pittsburgh Kutscher/Ott/Bormann SDPng Requirements draft-kutscher-mmusic-sdpng-req-00.txt Dirk Jörg
The Structure of the GNAT Compiler. A target-independent Ada95 front-end for GCC Ada components C components SyntaxSemExpandgigiGCC AST Annotated AST.
XCON architecture and protocol musings Henning Schulzrinne Columbia University.
7/ IETF, Pittsburgh Ott/Perkins/Kutscher Mbus Update draft-ietf-mmusic-mbus-transport-02.txt Jörg Colin
1212 Management and Communication of Distributed Conceptual Design Knowledge in the Building and Construction Industry Dr.ir. Jos van Leeuwen Eindhoven.
RTP Multiplexing draft-rosenberg-rtcweb-rtpmux Jonathan + {Rosenberg, Lennox}
Streaming Media Protocols Jani Hautakorpi Henry Pohan.
Introduction to SDP Issues. Content Background Goals SDP Primer RTP Primer Use cases “New” Functionalities in SDP Multiple RTP Streams in SDP Decision.
S New Security Developments in DICOM Lawrence Tarbox, Ph.D Chair, DICOM WG 14 (Security) Siemens Corporate Research.
RTCWEB Signaling Matthew Kaufman. Scope Web Server Browser.
 Copyright 2005 Digital Enterprise Research Institute. All rights reserved. Towards Translating between XML and WSML based on mappings between.
Draft-campbell-dime-load- considerations-01 IETF 92 DIME Working Group Meeting Dallas, Texas.
All rights reserved © 1999, Alcatel, Paris. page n° 1 SIP for Xcast SIP for the establishment of xcast-based multiparty.
Interoperability in Information Schemas Ruben Mendes Orientador: Prof. José Borbinha MEIC-Tagus Instituto Superior Técnico.
Programming Project (Last updated: August 31 st /2010) Updates: - All details of project given - Deadline: Part I: September 29 TH 2010 (in class) Part.
WebDAV Issues Munich IETF August 11, Property URL encoding At present, spec. allows encoding of the name of a property so it can be appended to.
Using DHCPv6 for DNS Configuration in Hosts draft-ietf-droms-dnsconfig-dhcpv6-00.txt Ralph Droms.
IETF 61 (November 2004) MMUSIC1 Application sharing Henning Schulzrinne Jonathan Lennox Jason Nieh Ricardo Baratto Columbia University.
A Conference Gateway Supporting Interoperability Between SIP and H.323 Jiann-Min Ho (Presenter) Jia-Cheng Hu Information Networking Institute Peter Steenkiste.
MD – Object Model Domain eSales Checker Presentation Régis Elling 26 th October 2005.
VoN September ‘98 1 9/17/98 VoN Standards Update Jonathan Rosenberg Bell Laboratories September 17, 1998.
Lab Assignment 15/ INF5060: Multimedia data communication using network processors.
Omar A. Abouabdalla Network Research Group (USM) SIP – Functionality and Structure of the Protocol SIP – Functionality and Structure of the Protocol By.
THE SUPPORTING ROLE OF ONTOLOGY IN A SIMULATION SYSTEM FOR COUNTERMEASURE EVALUATION Nelia Lombard DPSS, CSIR.
Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) Chapter 5 speaker : Wenping Zhang data :
Copyright © 2006 Addison-Wesley. All rights reserved. Ambiguity in Grammars A grammar is ambiguous if and only if it generates a sentential form that has.
IETF 57, Vienna1 SDPng Update Dirk Jörg Carsten draft-ietf-mmusic-sdpng-06.txt.
SDP Security Descriptions for Media Streams Mark Baugher Dan Wing - Cisco Systems -
IETF-81, Quebec City, July 25-29, 2011
S imple O bject A ccess P rotocol Karthikeyan Chandrasekaran & Nandakumar Padmanabhan.
Modul 4 Struktur Informasi Mata Kuliah Preservasi Informasi Digital.
48th IETFMMUSIC WG1 48th IETF - Pittsburgh 31 July August 2000.
Draft-ietf-fecframe-config-signaling-02 1 FEC framework Configuration Signaling draft-ietf-fecframe-config-signaling-02.txt IETF 76 Rajiv Asati.
06/28/06 1 TSG-C SWG 1.2 End-to-End Signalling of Over-the-Air QoS & Additional PSVT call flows June 28, 2006 Nikolai Leung, Hyukjune Chung QUALCOMM, Incorporated.
IETF 54, Yokohama Kutscher/Ott/Bormann 1 SDPng Update Dirk Jörg Carsten draft-ietf-mmusic-sdpng-05.txt.
SDP Simple Capability Negotiation (SDP Simcap) draft-andreasen-mmusic-sdp-simcap-reqts-00.txt draft-andreasen-mmusic-sdp-simcap-01.txt 50th IETF - March.
CLUE Overview and Architecture IETF 82 CLUE ad hoc meeting Allyn Romanow
Slide title In CAPITALS 50 pt Slide subtitle 32 pt RTSP draft-ietf-mmusic-rfc2396bis-10 Magnus Westerlund Co-auhtors: Henning Schulzrinne, Rob Lanphier,
1 Internet Telephony: Architecture and Protocols an IETF Perspective Authors:Henning Schulzrinne, Jonathan Rosenberg. Presenter: Sambhrama Mundkur.
OWL Web Ontology Language Summary IHan HSIAO (Sharon)
54 th IETFMMUSIC WG1 54 th IETF – Yokohama 18 July 2002.
XML and Distributed Applications By Quddus Chong Presentation for CS551 – Fall 2001.
SDP Security Descriptions for Media Streams draft-ietf-mmusic-sdescriptions-02.txt November 14, 2003 Flemming Andreasen Mark Baugher.
Standards Certification Education & Training Publishing Conferences & Exhibits Automation Connections ISA EXPO 2006 Wed, 1:00 Oct 18.
A Semi-Automated Digital Preservation System based on Semantic Web Services Jane Hunter Sharmin Choudhury DSTC PTY LTD, Brisbane, Australia Slides by Ananta.
Codec Control for RTCWEB
Batch to Manufacturing Markup Language B2MML - V0400
Use of “Latent Configurations" in CLUE
SDP Offer/Answer mechanism to negotiate the usage of bundled media
XCON WG IETF-64 Meeting XCON Framework Overview & Issues
IETF#67 – 5-10 November 2006 FECFRAME requirements (draft-ietf-fecframe-req-01) Mark Watson.
IMTC SIP Interconnect and SuperOp
IETF 56 – XMPP WG *prep e2e TINS.
IMTC SIP Interconnect and SuperOp
Princess Nourah bint Abdulrahman University
Semantic Markup for Semantic Web Tools:
CPPA3 Overview.
SDP Simple Capability Negotiation (SDP Simcap)
Presentation transcript:

IETF 53, Minneapolis Kutscher/Ott/Bormann 1 SDPng Update Dirk Jörg Carsten draft-ietf-mmusic-sdpng-04.txt

IETF 53, Minneapolis Kutscher/Ott/Bormann 2 Overview Changes in -04 Open Issues Next steps

IETF 53, Minneapolis Kutscher/Ott/Bormann 3 Changes in -04 Generic syntax mechanisms for re- using definitions –sdpng:use for referencing named definitions –sdpng:group to name a group of definitions for later referencing –sdpng:prop to add properties to definitions Capability negotiation

IETF 53, Minneapolis Kutscher/Ott/Bormann 4 Capability Negotiation Offer/Answer: –Select one (or more) configuration alternatives from the set of offered configurations –Typically, the answerer matches offer against list of supported configurations –Problem: Some applications (e.g., video) can require many configuration parameters Representing each variant as an individual alternative not practical

IETF 53, Minneapolis Kutscher/Ott/Bormann 5 Capability Negotiation in SDPng Language mechanisms to describe supported value ranges for configuration parameters –“For codec X, I can support frame rates 6,12,24 and codec options foo and bar” Algorithms to compare and collapse two descriptions –Result: A commonly supported configuration (if it exists)

IETF 53, Minneapolis Kutscher/Ott/Bormann 6 Some Assumptions This should be simple –Limited set of data types and collapsing rules Usable for SIP, RTSP, SAP, MEGACO –Message size, implementation complexity –SIP: SDPng exchange in one offer/answer cycle Extensible –No fixed identifiers –Collapsing is possible without knowing semantics of configuration descriptions Can collapse without having to know schema definition etc.

IETF 53, Minneapolis Kutscher/Ott/Bormann 7 Conceptual Overview A determines potential configurations and generates CAP(A) A B CAP(A)

IETF 53, Minneapolis Kutscher/Ott/Bormann 8 B generates CAP(B), according to the set of components from A’s description that B wants to support. A B CAP(A) CAP(B) CAP(A) CAP(B)

IETF 53, Minneapolis Kutscher/Ott/Bormann 9 Both A and B can compute CAP(AB), the list of commonly supported potential configurations. A B CAP(A) CAP(B) CAP(AB) CAP(A) CAP(B)

IETF 53, Minneapolis Kutscher/Ott/Bormann 10 A selects the actual configuration CFG(AB). A B CAP(A) CAP(B) CAP(AB) CFG(AB) CAP(A) CAP(B)

IETF 53, Minneapolis Kutscher/Ott/Bormann 11 A augments CFG(AB) with A’s non- negotiable transport parameters and generates CFG_T(A). A B CAP(A) CAP(B) CAP(AB) CFG(AB) CFG_T(A) CAP(A) CAP(B)

IETF 53, Minneapolis Kutscher/Ott/Bormann 12 A B B receives CFG_T(A) and adds its own transport parameters, resulting in CFG_T(AB). CAP(A) CAP(B) CAP(AB) CFG(AB) CFG_T(A) CFG_T(AB) CAP(A) CAP(B)

IETF 53, Minneapolis Kutscher/Ott/Bormann 13 A B A sends capabilities and transport parameters. CAP(A) + CFG_T(A) CAP(A) Optimization CFG_T(A) CAP(B) CFG_T(A)

IETF 53, Minneapolis Kutscher/Ott/Bormann 14 A B B computes CAP(AB) and generates CFG_T(AB). CAP(A) + CFG_T(A) CAP(A) CFG_T(A) CAP(B) CFG_T(A) CFG_T(AB)

IETF 53, Minneapolis Kutscher/Ott/Bormann 15 Properties of the Negotiation Procedure Integration of transport parameters in “offer” –Concept of non-negotiable parameters “Context-free” processing –Process capability descriptions without knowing schema definition and semantics –Encode type info into parameters, infer collapsing rule

IETF 53, Minneapolis Kutscher/Ott/Bormann 16 Collapsing Example A B Result

IETF 53, Minneapolis Kutscher/Ott/Bormann 17 Data Types Set of symbols –[FOO,4,5]  [BAR,3,4]  [4] –Collapsing rule: intersection Numerical ranges –(3,10)  (5,12)  (5,10) –Collapsing rule: determine common range Optional string parameters –“FOO”  “BAR”  “” –Collapsing rule: test for equality

IETF 53, Minneapolis Kutscher/Ott/Bormann 18 Open Issue #1: Global View With SIP/SDP, we send participant- specific descriptions Can lead to ambiguity (e.g., asymmetric configurations) Global view: Disambiguate all descriptions Relate to participant –Participant-identifier? Useful for multi-party scenarios Adds some complexity

IETF 53, Minneapolis Kutscher/Ott/Bormann 19 Open Issue #2: External Definitions External libraries –How useful are they in real life? Resolving references to libraries at call-setup time… –Always include all definitions?

IETF 53, Minneapolis Kutscher/Ott/Bormann 20 Open Issue #3: Capability Negotiation What functionality is really needed? –Current draft provides a simple, limited solution Limited set of data types Optimized, application specific processing rules Other, more generic work exists –CC/PP, CONNEG etc. –How much re-use is useful? –Technical discussion required!

IETF 53, Minneapolis Kutscher/Ott/Bormann 21 Open Issue #4: Capability Negotiation Semantics of descriptions and negotiation results –Multiple alternatives for a component Select one? Support any? –Ranges for parameters in final descriptions Are senders free to select values? Do changes require signaling? Non-negotiable parameters –Currently under-specified…

IETF 53, Minneapolis Kutscher/Ott/Bormann 22 Open Issue #5: Internal References SPDng provides mechanisms to name definitions and re-use them –Compact definitions, grouping etc. For capability negotiation, all references MUST be resolved –Collapsing process yields a new description instance –How to generate a compact description instance again?

IETF 53, Minneapolis Kutscher/Ott/Bormann 23 Open Issue #6: Profiles Designing profiles –Current draft provides merely examples Audio, RTP, UDP, IPv4 –Complete set of basic profiles for RTP/AVP required Payload type assignment –Security: MIKEY in SDPng –QoS Different types of QoS parameters

IETF 53, Minneapolis Kutscher/Ott/Bormann 24 Next Steps Restructuring specification –Split document: Framework document –General model, scenarios –  Informational? SPDng spec. –Syntax, processing algorithms –  Standards track Profiles –Some basic profiles covering RTP/AVP –  Standards track Editorial changes required –Make examples consistent, fix bugs

IETF 53, Minneapolis Kutscher/Ott/Bormann 25 Next Steps Complete list of open issues –Discuss (and resolve) on the mailing list Work on profiles Fix remaining issues

IETF 53, Minneapolis Kutscher/Ott/Bormann 26 SDPng implementation C++ library Works with expat (XML parser) –Any other event-based parser should be fine Covers sdpng-03 –Newer stuff currently being implemented