Original text:
Any profile in the offer matching one of the following MUST be accepted: <del> "RTP/AVP" </del>  <del> "RTP/AVPF" </del>  <del> "RTP/SAVP" </del>  <del> "RTP/SAVPF" </del>  <del> "UDP/TLS/RTP/AVP" </del>  <del> "UDP/TLS/RTP/AVPF" </del>  <del> "UDP/TLS/RTP/SAVP" </del>  <del> "UDP/TLS/RTP/SAVPF" "TCP/TLS/RTP/SAVP" "TCP/TLS/RTP/SAVPF" </del>  The profile in any "m=" line in any generated answer MUST exactly match the profile provided in the offer.

Reviewer comments:
The only draft or RFC that uses "UDP/TLS/RTP/AVP" is one typo in URL I just reported an RFC Errata on that. I think the argument here is anyone who was advertising TLS in the label, also put the S in the SAVP so we don't need to worry about any of the cases where we have TLS. The case with TCP it is a bit different. You can take RTP (not SRTP) and send it as unencrypted RTP over a normal TLS (not DTLS-SRTP) tunnel so for that case the label is TCP/TLS/RTP/AVPF. However, this is RTP over 4571 framing so treating it as SRTP is going to not work. Because of this, I think we need to remove all the options from this list that are RTP (not SRTP) framed over 4571. That means remove from the list "TCP/RTP/AVP", "TCP/RTP/AVPF" , "TCP/TLS/RTP/AVP" , "TCP/TLS/RTP/AVPF". For "TCP/RTP/SAVP" and "TCP/RTP/SAVPF", this is SRTP with 4571 framing over TCP ( See URL ). Since this is not DTLS-SRTP, it seems we should also remove theses two labels as well. So what I am proposing is we move the list to be just "RTP/AVP" "RTP/AVPF" "RTP/SAVP" "RTP/SAVPF" "TCP/DTLS/RTP/SAVP" "TCP/DTLS/RTP/SAVPF" "UDP/TLS/RTP/SAVP" "UDP/TLS/RTP/SAVPF" Backing up to first principals on this, the problem we are tying to solve is an offer that is offering RTP or DTLS-SRTP. It is going to have RTP/AVP[F] and a fingerprint so it seems as long as we have that on the list it is good. Of some one, RTP/SAVP is defined in URL(and the RTP/SAVFP version in URL) while the UDP/TLS/RTP/SAVP[F] is in URL )
I added the refs for where these are defined. If that look OK, I think this is ready to merge.
table is at URL
So when I take that table and do grep AVP grep -v MBMS I get RTP/AVP RTP/AVPF RTP/SAVP RTP/SAVPF TCP/DTLS/RTP/SAVP TCP/DTLS/RTP/SAVPF TCP/RTP/AVP TCP/RTP/AVPF TCP/RTP/SAVP TCP/RTP/SAVPF TCP/TLS/RTP/AVP TCP/TLS/RTP/AVPF UDP/TLS/RTP/SAVP UDP/TLS/RTP/SAVPF The diff from what we have now is < TCP/DTLS/RTP/SAVP < TCP/DTLS/RTP/SAVPF < TCP/RTP/AVP < TCP/RTP/AVPF < TCP/RTP/SAVP < TCP/RTP/SAVPF < TCP/TLS/RTP/AVP < TCP/TLS/RTP/AVPF
NAME be sure to check the references for the profiles.

Revised text:
Any profile in the offer matching one of the following MUST be accepted:  <ins> "RTP/AVP" (Defined in RFC4566, Section 8.2.2) </ins>  <ins> "RTP/AVPF" (Defined in RFC4585, Section 9) </ins>  <ins> "RTP/SAVP" (Defined in RFC3711, Section 12) </ins>  <ins> "RTP/SAVPF" (Defined in RFC5124, Section 6) </ins>  <ins> "TCP/DTLS/RTP/SAVP" (Defined in RFC7850, Section 3.4) </ins>  <ins> "TCP/DTLS/RTP/SAVPF" (Defined in RFC7850, Section 3.5) </ins>  <ins> "UDP/TLS/RTP/SAVP" (Defined in RFC5764, Section 9) </ins>  <ins> "UDP/TLS/RTP/SAVPF" (Defined in RFC5764, Section 9) </ins> The profile in any "m=" line in any generated answer MUST exactly match the profile provided in the offer.