-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 42
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Routing Rules Update #602
Routing Rules Update #602
Conversation
Routing Rules update to address compatibility with Section 7 of https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-rtcweb-jsep Addresses the following issues: #368, #546, #547
LGTM |
Remove SSRC latching for PT table matches
Update rules for setting the PT table
@ibc Can you review? |
Yes, I'll do it on next week (holidays now) |
Revised rtx.ssrc unset algorithm
May be I miss something, but I see a problem within the following example: codecs:
[
{ payloadType: 100, name: "audio/opus" }
{ payloadType: 101, name: "audio/CN" }
],
encodings:
[
{ codecPayloadType: 100 }
] AFAIU, with the new algorithm in the PR, "audio/CN" will be ignored. Am I wrong? |
@ibc What if we set pt_table[parameters.codecs[j].payloadType] to receiver for all values of j from 0 to codecs.length-1, with the exception of entries for parameter.encodings[i].codecPayloadType where parameter.encodings[i].ssrc is set, for values of i from 0 to encodings.length-1? |
That would create conflicts ( |
IMHO this should be more strict, something such as:
This is, don't allow incomplete parameters. All or none. |
Ideally yes but, as noted above, there is no perfect solution. That's why I suggest "all or none", this is:
|
Update the markup
@ibc OK. Let me come up with a revised PR. |
Routing Rules update to address outstanding issues as well as to be more compatible with Section 6 of https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-rtcweb-jsep-17#page-66
Addresses the following issues: #368, #546, #547