draft-ietf-mmusic-rfc4566bis-03.txt   draft-ietf-mmusic-rfc4566bis-04.txt 
Network Working Group M. Handley Network Working Group M. Handley
Internet-Draft UCL Internet-Draft UCL
Obsoletes: 4566 (if approved) V. Jacobson Obsoletes: 4566 (if approved) V. Jacobson
Intended status: Standards Track Packet Design Intended status: Standards Track Packet Design
Expires: November 6, 2011 C. Perkins Expires: April 26, 2012 C. Perkins
University of Glasgow University of Glasgow
A. Begen A. Begen
Cisco Cisco
May 5, 2011 October 24, 2011
SDP: Session Description Protocol SDP: Session Description Protocol
draft-ietf-mmusic-rfc4566bis-03 draft-ietf-mmusic-rfc4566bis-04
Abstract Abstract
This memo defines the Session Description Protocol (SDP). SDP is This memo defines the Session Description Protocol (SDP). SDP is
intended for describing multimedia sessions for the purposes of intended for describing multimedia sessions for the purposes of
session announcement, session invitation, and other forms of session announcement, session invitation, and other forms of
multimedia session initiation. multimedia session initiation.
Status of This Memo Status of This Memo
skipping to change at page 1, line 38 skipping to change at page 1, line 38
Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering
Task Force (IETF). Note that other groups may also distribute Task Force (IETF). Note that other groups may also distribute
working documents as Internet-Drafts. The list of current Internet- working documents as Internet-Drafts. The list of current Internet-
Drafts is at http://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/. Drafts is at http://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/.
Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months
and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any
time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference
material or to cite them other than as "work in progress." material or to cite them other than as "work in progress."
This Internet-Draft will expire on November 6, 2011. This Internet-Draft will expire on April 26, 2012.
Copyright Notice Copyright Notice
Copyright (c) 2011 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the Copyright (c) 2011 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the
document authors. All rights reserved. document authors. All rights reserved.
This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal
Provisions Relating to IETF Documents Provisions Relating to IETF Documents
(http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of (http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of
publication of this document. Please review these documents publication of this document. Please review these documents
skipping to change at page 11, line 38 skipping to change at page 11, line 38
strings MUST be interpreted as containing ISO-10646 characters in strings MUST be interpreted as containing ISO-10646 characters in
UTF-8 encoding (the presence of the "a=charset" attribute may force UTF-8 encoding (the presence of the "a=charset" attribute may force
some fields to be interpreted differently). some fields to be interpreted differently).
A session description can contain domain names in the "o=", "u=", A session description can contain domain names in the "o=", "u=",
"e=", "c=", and "a=" lines. Any domain name used in SDP MUST comply "e=", "c=", and "a=" lines. Any domain name used in SDP MUST comply
with [RFC1034], [RFC1035]. Internationalised domain names (IDNs) with [RFC1034], [RFC1035]. Internationalised domain names (IDNs)
MUST be represented using the ASCII Compatible Encoding (ACE) form MUST be represented using the ASCII Compatible Encoding (ACE) form
defined in [RFC5890] and MUST NOT be directly represented in UTF-8 or defined in [RFC5890] and MUST NOT be directly represented in UTF-8 or
any other encoding (this requirement is for compatibility with any other encoding (this requirement is for compatibility with
[RFC2327] and other early SDP-related standards, which predate the [RFC4566] and other early SDP-related standards, which predate the
development of internationalised domain names). development of internationalised domain names).
5.1. Protocol Version ("v=") 5.1. Protocol Version ("v=")
v=0 v=0
The "v=" field gives the version of the Session Description Protocol. The "v=" field gives the version of the Session Description Protocol.
This memo defines version 0. There is no minor version number. This memo defines version 0. There is no minor version number.
5.2. Origin ("o=") 5.2. Origin ("o=")
skipping to change at page 35, line 28 skipping to change at page 35, line 28
media other than existing top-level media content types, a Standards media other than existing top-level media content types, a Standards
Track RFC MUST be produced for a new top-level content type to be Track RFC MUST be produced for a new top-level content type to be
registered, and the registration MUST provide good justification why registered, and the registration MUST provide good justification why
no existing media name is appropriate (the "Standards Action" policy no existing media name is appropriate (the "Standards Action" policy
of [RFC5226]. of [RFC5226].
This memo registers the media types "audio", "video", "text", This memo registers the media types "audio", "video", "text",
"application", and "message". "application", and "message".
Note: The media types "control" and "data" were listed as valid in an Note: The media types "control" and "data" were listed as valid in an
early version of this specification [RFC2327]; however, their early version of this specification (RFC 2327); however, their
semantics were never fully specified and they are not widely used. semantics were never fully specified and they are not widely used.
These media types have been removed in this specification, although These media types have been removed in this specification, although
they still remain valid media type capabilities for a SIP user agent they still remain valid media type capabilities for a SIP user agent
as defined in [RFC3840]. If these media types are considered useful as defined in [RFC3840]. If these media types are considered useful
in the future, a Standards Track RFC MUST be produced to document in the future, a Standards Track RFC MUST be produced to document
their use. Until that is done, applications SHOULD NOT use these their use. Until that is done, applications SHOULD NOT use these
types and SHOULD NOT declare support for them in SIP capabilities types and SHOULD NOT declare support for them in SIP capabilities
declarations (even though they exist in the registry created by declarations (even though they exist in the registry created by
[RFC3840]). [RFC3840]).
skipping to change at page 46, line 23 skipping to change at page 46, line 23
[RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate [RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate
Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, March 1997. Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, March 1997.
[RFC5234] Crocker, D. and P. Overell, "Augmented BNF for [RFC5234] Crocker, D. and P. Overell, "Augmented BNF for
Syntax Specifications: ABNF", STD 68, RFC 5234, Syntax Specifications: ABNF", STD 68, RFC 5234,
January 2008. January 2008.
[RFC3629] Yergeau, F., "UTF-8, a transformation format of ISO [RFC3629] Yergeau, F., "UTF-8, a transformation format of ISO
10646", STD 63, RFC 3629, November 2003. 10646", STD 63, RFC 3629, November 2003.
[RFC2327] Handley, M. and V. Jacobson, "SDP: Session
Description Protocol", RFC 2327, April 1998.
[RFC3986] Berners-Lee, T., Fielding, R., and L. Masinter, [RFC3986] Berners-Lee, T., Fielding, R., and L. Masinter,
"Uniform Resource Identifier (URI): Generic Syntax", "Uniform Resource Identifier (URI): Generic Syntax",
STD 66, RFC 3986, January 2005. STD 66, RFC 3986, January 2005.
[RFC5226] Narten, T. and H. Alvestrand, "Guidelines for [RFC5226] Narten, T. and H. Alvestrand, "Guidelines for
Writing an IANA Considerations Section in RFCs", Writing an IANA Considerations Section in RFCs",
BCP 26, RFC 5226, May 2008. BCP 26, RFC 5226, May 2008.
[RFC5646] Phillips, A. and M. Davis, "Tags for Identifying [RFC5646] Phillips, A. and M. Davis, "Tags for Identifying
Languages", BCP 47, RFC 5646, September 2009. Languages", BCP 47, RFC 5646, September 2009.
skipping to change at page 46, line 49 skipping to change at page 46, line 46
Framework", RFC 5890, August 2010. Framework", RFC 5890, August 2010.
[RFC4648] Josefsson, S., "The Base16, Base32, and Base64 Data [RFC4648] Josefsson, S., "The Base16, Base32, and Base64 Data
Encodings", RFC 4648, October 2006. Encodings", RFC 4648, October 2006.
[RFC4566] Handley, M., Jacobson, V., and C. Perkins, "SDP: [RFC4566] Handley, M., Jacobson, V., and C. Perkins, "SDP:
Session Description Protocol", RFC 4566, July 2006. Session Description Protocol", RFC 4566, July 2006.
12.2. Informative References 12.2. Informative References
[RFC2327] Handley, M. and V. Jacobson, "SDP: Session
Description Protocol", RFC 2327, April 1998.
[RFC5905] Mills, D., Martin, J., Burbank, J., and W. Kasch, [RFC5905] Mills, D., Martin, J., Burbank, J., and W. Kasch,
"Network Time Protocol Version 4: Protocol and "Network Time Protocol Version 4: Protocol and
Algorithms Specification", RFC 5905, June 2010. Algorithms Specification", RFC 5905, June 2010.
[RFC2974] Handley, M., Perkins, C., and E. Whelan, "Session [RFC2974] Handley, M., Perkins, C., and E. Whelan, "Session
Announcement Protocol", RFC 2974, October 2000. Announcement Protocol", RFC 2974, October 2000.
[RFC3261] Rosenberg, J., Schulzrinne, H., Camarillo, G., [RFC3261] Rosenberg, J., Schulzrinne, H., Camarillo, G.,
Johnston, A., Peterson, J., Sparks, R., Handley, M., Johnston, A., Peterson, J., Sparks, R., Handley, M.,
and E. Schooler, "SIP: Session Initiation Protocol", and E. Schooler, "SIP: Session Initiation Protocol",
skipping to change at page 48, line 42 skipping to change at page 48, line 42
UK UK
EMail: M.Handley@cs.ucl.ac.uk EMail: M.Handley@cs.ucl.ac.uk
Van Jacobson Van Jacobson
Packet Design Packet Design
2465 Latham Street 2465 Latham Street
Mountain View, CA 94040 Mountain View, CA 94040
USA USA
EMail: van@packetdesign.com EMail: van@parc.com
Colin Perkins Colin Perkins
University of Glasgow University of Glasgow
Department of Computing Science School of Computing Science
17 Lilybank Gardens University of Glasgow
Glasgow G12 8QQ Glasgow G12 8QQ
UK UK
EMail: csp@csperkins.org EMail: csp@csperkins.org
Ali Begen Ali Begen
Cisco Cisco
181 Bay Street 181 Bay Street
Toronto, ON M5J 2T3 Toronto, ON M5J 2T3
Canada Canada
 End of changes. 10 change blocks. 
12 lines changed or deleted 12 lines changed or added

This html diff was produced by rfcdiff 1.33. The latest version is available from http://tools.ietf.org/tools/rfcdiff/