Hey Alexey, On 27 sept. 2011, at 00:24, Alexey Melnikov <alexey.melni...@isode.com> wrote:
> Jonathan Lennox wrote: > >> Hi, Alexey -- thank you for the Gen-ART review. >> > Hi Jonathan, > >> Alexey Melnikov writes: >> >>> Question: are the two encoding of the audio level indication option >>> specified in the document really necessary? >>> >> >> Do you mean the one-byte vs. two-byte forms of the header extension (Figure >> 1 vs. Figure 2)? These are the two forms of the generic header extensions >> defined by RFC 5285. >> > I understood that. Does RFC 5285 require that both forms should be allowed? It doesn't explicitly say so but it It actually does, yes. Here's what it says: A stream MUST contain only one-byte or two-byte headers: they MUST NOT be mixed within a stream. Audio level headers can find themselves in streams that also have other, longer extensions, which do require the two-byte header. The above lines mandate that in such cases they all use the two-byte header. In the same regard, although probably a bit less likely, nothing prevents having another sixteen header extensions in a stream that also has levels. In that case we'd need to switch to two-byte headers in order to be able to fit all the IDs. Cheers, Emil --sent from my mobile > In general, it would be good to avoid multiple representations of the same > thing. > >> The actual payload (one byte containing the V and level bits) is identical >> in the two cases; the only difference is the container. We can add some >> text clarifying this point if you think it would be helpful. >> >>> Nits/editorial comments: >>> s/relys/relies ??? >>> >> Thanks, will fix. >> >
_______________________________________________ Ietf mailing list Ietf@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
