From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============3933290185932654618==" MIME-Version: 1.0 From: Denis Kenzior Subject: Re: [PATCH v0 09/10] handsfree-audio: Add function to get hfp version Date: Mon, 04 Mar 2013 13:30:33 -0600 Message-ID: <5134F659.9040900@gmail.com> In-Reply-To: List-Id: To: ofono@ofono.org --===============3933290185932654618== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hi Marcel, >> >> I don't see why not. Both Codec Negotiation and Wide-band speech are la= beled optional for HF/AG in Table 3.1. The only note there says: "If Wide = Band Speech is supported, Codec Negotiation shall also be supported." Howe= ver, there is no note vice-versa. So my interpretation is that Codec Negot= iation can always be supported. Can we check the test spec? >> >> The problem I see is that by the time we register the SDP record, we sti= ll do not know for sure whether the audio framework truly supports mSBC. > > so we want to expose HFP 1.6 and codec negogiation all the time. Even if = mSBC codec is not available, because PA does not support it or is not runni= ng. I read the spec the same way that this fully spec compliant. > > If at some point in the future this changes, we can deal with that at tha= t point. No need to over engineer it at this point. > Exactly, Codec negotiation should always be supported. . What my last comment was about is that: If mSBC is not supported by PA, then it would be nice to not set the = wide-band speech bit in the SDP record to true. However, we do not know = this information in the current set up until too late. Regards, -Denis --===============3933290185932654618==--