similar to: Comments on New RTP Profile Document

All: Attached please find yet another RTP profile revision (v5). You can also find the document at: http://www.herlein.com/downloads/speex/docs/ Changes: - added vbr, cng, ebw, sr optional parameters to MIME - added vbr, cng, ebw a=fmtp options for SDP use - added required document attributes for submission to IETF and IANA (format and author contact information). Note that we

> Otherwise Greg, can you send the latest version of the RTP draft so I > can put it on the site (the current one is getting old)? Attached for all to see. Greg -------------- next part -------------- Internet Engineering Task Force Greg Herlein Internet Draft Jean-Marc Valin draft-herlein-speex-rtp-profile-06

Hi all, Please find below the -01 update to draft-herlein-speex-rtp-profile, as submitted to the IETF. Regards Phil <p>-------------------8<-----------------------------------8<--------------------- <p><p>Internet Engineering Task Force Greg Herlein Internet Draft Jean-Marc Valin

Hello, What's the purpose of the 'sr' sdp parameter ? The sample rate is already given in the a=rtpmap line ? Simon Le dim 29/06/2003 à 12:12, philkerr@elec.gla.ac.uk a écrit : > Hi all, > > Please find below an updated Speex Internet Draft document. > > It would be good if we could book some time for discussion on Speex at the IETF > meeting in Vienna (scheduled

The latest revision of the draft RTP Profile is attached for review. This will be submitted to the IETF Audio-Video Transport Working Group for consideration immediately, so if you have any more comments, let us know. In addition, we will be applying for an official MIME type. Note that the AVP code and the MIME type in this latest revision have been changed from "SPX" to

Hi, We'd like to announce the first draft for the Speex RTP profile. It was written essentially by Greg Herlein, with some help from Simon Morlat and I. We'd like to get some feedback on it before it is sent to the IETF. Basically this will allow all SIP based VoIP applications using Speex to inter-operate. For those interested, there's already Simon's LinPhone (www.linphone.org)

Alfred E. Heggestad wrote: > <...> > > If we don't get any comments in 1 week (by 22. May 2007) we will go ahead > and submit it to the IETF. Of course you can comment on it also after it > has been submitted, but we would like to get the input from the Speex > community first.. > thanks for all the input. please find attached an updated version of the draft. I

Hi Please find an updated version of the Speex I-D attached. The only change is addition of the copyright conditions in Appendix A, as requested by Ivo. Many thanks for your input. I will give you a few more days before submitting to AVT working group /alfred Ivo Emanuel Gon?alves wrote: > Do not forget to add the "Copying conditions" to the RFC. > > Check

Hi all, Please find below an updated Speex Internet Draft document. It would be good if we could book some time for discussion on Speex at the IETF meeting in Vienna (scheduled for 14th July). The cutoff for submission is 9:00am EDT, (GMT -04:00), 30th June. Comments and feedback welcomed! Regards Phil

Looks good to me. Jean-Marc Alfred E. Heggestad a ?crit : > Hi > > Please find an updated version of the Speex I-D attached. The only > change is addition of the copyright conditions in Appendix A, > as requested by Ivo. > > Many thanks for your input. > > I will give you a few more days before submitting to AVT working group > > > /alfred > > Ivo

Hi all We are about to send an updated version of the internet draft "RTP Payload Format for the Speex Codec" to the IETF AVT working group. Before submitting we would like your input, if you have any comments or input please send them to the mailing list. If we don't get any comments in 1 week (by 22. May 2007) we will go ahead and submit it to the IETF. Of course you can comment

Here my comments: Page 3: To be compliant with this specification, implementations MUST support 8 kHz sampling rate (narrowband)" and SHOULD support 8 kbps bitrate. The sampling rate MUST be 8, 16 or 32 kHz. There is a type above after (narrowband), there is a " extra character. I don't understand what is the motivation to specify "SHOULD support 8 kbps

comment inline. On Wed, 16 May 2007, Jean-Marc Valin wrote: >> Page 3: >> >> To be compliant with this specification, implementations MUST support >> 8 kHz sampling rate (narrowband)" and SHOULD support 8 kbps bitrate. >> The sampling rate MUST be 8, 16 or 32 kHz. >> >> There is a type above after (narrowband), there is a " extra

On Tue, Dec 17, 2002 at 11:55:21PM -0800, Greg Herlein wrote: > If such a thing happens, discussion of the RTP profile draft > would be most welcome - please get responses back to the > list! Now, if this were finalised before the conference then we could do a demo and use it for broadcasting the lectures streams around the world... What is currently the best way of doing this? I'm

> Page 3: > > To be compliant with this specification, implementations MUST support > 8 kHz sampling rate (narrowband)" and SHOULD support 8 kbps bitrate. > The sampling rate MUST be 8, 16 or 32 kHz. > > There is a type above after (narrowband), there is a " extra character. > > I don't understand what is the motivation to specify "SHOULD

On Wed, 16 May 2007, Jean-Marc Valin wrote: >>> The main idea is that Speex supports many bit-rates, but for one reason >>> or another, some modes may be left out in implementations (e.g. for RAM >>> or network reasons). What we're saying here is that you should make an >>> effoft to at least support (and offer) the 8 kbps mode to maximise >>>

Hi, I have a few questions/remarks about the draft, in particular about the SDP usage of Speex (section 5): - Which samplerate should be used if you receive something like m=3Daudio 8008 RTP/AVP 97 a=3Drtpmap:97 speex/8000 a=3Dfmtp:97 sr=3D16000;ebw=3Dultra - There is an inconsistency in the description of the 'penh'parameter. According to the description,

All: My presentation to the IETF on the proposed Speex payload format did not occur. Details below. Progress continues, though, towards getting the Speex payload format approved. Greg ---------- Forwarded message ---------- Date: Fri, 21 Mar 2003 08:58:23 -0800 (PST) From: Stephen Casner <casner@acm.org> To: Greg Herlein <gherlein@herlein.com> Cc: avt@ietf.org Subject: Re: [AVT]

All: The latest draft RTP Payload Format for Speex is available via the IETF. See below for details. Greg ---------- Forwarded message ---------- Date: Tue, 09 Mar 2004 15:56:23 -0500 From: Internet-Drafts@ietf.org To: IETF-Announce: ; Subject: I-D ACTION:draft-herlein-avt-rtp-speex-00.txt A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts directories. <p>

I am not sure what you mean by the ful SIP signaling? Here is the trace for the sip.conf which works successfully. Below that, I will include the trace for the pjsip.conf which it seems Vitelity isn't accepting the ACK in response to the OK ---- SIP --- <--- Transmitting SIP request (1004 bytes) to UDP:64.2.142.93:5060 ---> INVITE sip:8005555555 at 64.2.142.93 SIP/2.0 Via: SIP/2.0/UDP