Subject: RTSP embedded data and multiple connections; grammar errors

From: Jonathan Sergent <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 07 Sep 2000 14:16:11 -0700

If an RTSP session is being controlled over multiple connections, and a
SETUP is done for interleaved transport, should the data sent back on
the connection where the SETUP arrived, or the connection where the
PLAY arrived?

Doing it where the SETUP arrived seems right (else it is not possible
to validate channel IDs at SETUP time).  Is this what others do?

Also, I noticed what seem to be a few minor errors in the RFC:

Section 12: 
        If-Match is missing from the header table but is in 12.22.

Section 12.39: 
        The grammar is missing the 'source' parameter.
        The argument for 'destination' is optional; this seems wrong.
        The grammar for 'mode' seems wrong.  How about:
                       |    ";" "mode" = <"> 1\#Method <">

It would actually be easier to parse if it was just multiple instances
of the mode attribute (which the grammar already allows)... quoted
nested lists don't appear elsewhere.

-- 
Jonathan Sergent / [email-masked]

---

From: Henning Schulzrinne <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 08 Sep 2000 16:03:55 -0400

Jonathan Sergent wrote:

>                        |    ";" "mode" = <"> 1\#Method <">

Fixed; thanks.

> nested lists don't appear elsewhere.

Repeated parameters are not really common in any of the HTTP-style
grammars, so I don't think that's a viable option.

-- 
Henning Schulzrinne   http://www.cs.columbia.edu/~hgs

---

From: [email-masked] (Ron Frederick)
Date: Fri, 08 Sep 2000 15:53:39 -0700

> to validate channel IDs at SETUP time).  Is this what others do?
I've never tried this with our server, but in thinking about how the code
works, I believe it would in fact send the data on the connection that the
SETUP was done on. That's the only thing that really makes sense, for the
reason you mentioned.
--
Ron Frederick
[email-masked]