Re: Format of SDP

2015-03-09 Thread Randell Jesup
> I do not know when Chrome will remove them. Firefox has never supported SDES. To expand on this: The rtcweb Working Group in the IETF agreed (overwhelmingly) that SDES "MUST NOT" be supported. (And this was strongly supported by the author of SDES.) -- Randell Jesup, Mozilla _

Re: Format of SDP

2015-03-05 Thread jon . peter . davies
On Thursday, March 5, 2015 at 3:32:46 PM UTC, Eric Rescorla wrote: > This isn't going to work very well, with any version of Firefox. > > The semantics of this SDP is that you are offering a bunch of audio > streams, and that each of them is (for some unknown reason) with > a different codec. > >

Re: Format of SDP

2015-03-05 Thread Eric Rescorla
On Thu, Mar 5, 2015 at 9:46 AM, wrote: > On Thursday, March 5, 2015 at 3:32:46 PM UTC, Eric Rescorla wrote: > > This isn't going to work very well, with any version of Firefox. > > > > The semantics of this SDP is that you are offering a bunch of audio > > streams, and that each of them is (for s

Re: Format of SDP

2015-03-05 Thread Eric Rescorla
This isn't going to work very well, with any version of Firefox. The semantics of this SDP is that you are offering a bunch of audio streams, and that each of them is (for some unknown reason) with a different codec. Firefox prior to 37 only supports one audio stream so it will try to accept the

Format of SDP

2015-03-05 Thread jon . peter . davies
I used Firefox 33.1, with JsSIP and Kamailio, with a call to our desktop video-conferencing application running on Windows. We were assessing interoperability between the audio and video codecs. Our application sent SDP with one media line per payload, rather than one media line containing a lis