Subject: RE: Mute vs. PAUSE in RTSP

From: "Steven Levi (ICCD)" <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 25 Mar 1997 10:07:14 -0800

Sorry, I do not under stand the value of mute at all.  For multicast
(and live unicast) , is should  just stop/un-join (stop) . When one
wants to "un-mute" it should just start again - why add an extra verb
and additional server state. Similarly, for on-demand - if the client
wants to mute it should:  a) turn down the volume :-)  or b) perform  a
stop, monitor the time duration between mute and un-mute, and start at
the new location.  This command implies the need for  totally
unnecessary state on the server side that could easily be managed by the
client. 

	-----Original Message-----
	From:	Henning Schulzrinne [SMTP:[email-masked]]
	Sent:	Tuesday, March 25, 1997 5:42 AM
	To:	Sampo Syreeni
	Cc:	[email-masked]
	Subject:	Re: Mute vs. PAUSE in RTSP

	Muting for multicast should be done by dropping membership, so
that the
	network can be relieved of carrying data. Does not require RTSP
help
	(and RTSP wouldn't help here, anyway).

	In discussions I've had since I wrote this note, I'm becoming
more
	convinced that a single RTSP session should really only control
a single
	media stream (which may consist of several substreams, as when
you are
	delivering a Quicktime/AVI/ASF movie) to avoid problems with
	presentation authors piecing together unrelated media objects.
Muting,
	however, may still be useful in some circumstances, but its
interaction
	with PAUSE requires further thought. Probably a version-2 item.