Re: [AVT] SVC and multiscreen

Hi Stuart,

We authors have had a conference call last Friday on your draft, and will
have another one later this week. So, as Stephan said, please give us a bit
more time, then we will form our common opinion and come back to you.

BR, YK 

> -----Original Message-----
> From: avt-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:avt-bounces@ietf.org] On 
> Behalf Of Stephan Wenger
> Sent: Monday, December 14, 2009 8:02 PM
> To: Stuart Taylor (sttaylor); IETF AVT WG
> Subject: Re: [AVT] SVC and multiscreen
> 
> Stuart,
> 
> 
> On 12/14/09 9:51 AM, "Stuart Taylor (sttaylor)" 
> <sttaylor@cisco.com> wrote:
> 
> > [...]
> > I was hoping that the authors of
> > draft-ietf-avt-rtp-svc-20 would at least respond to this 
> proposal, but 
> > apparently it has been ignored.
> 
> You are jumping to conclusions.  Give us some more time.
> 
> Stephan
> 
> > 
> > Stuart Taylor
> > Cisco Systems
> > 
> > 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: avt-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:avt-bounces@ietf.org] On 
> Behalf Of 
> > Roni Even
> > Sent: Sunday, December 13, 2009 4:07 PM
> > To: 'Tom Taylor'; 'IETF AVT WG'
> > Subject: Re: [AVT] SVC and multiscreen
> > 
> > Hi,
> > The current text in the draft describe a possible use case 
> for SVC and 
> > does not add any value to the SVC draft.
> > I got some impression that the authors would like to describe such 
> > application where the receiver will be able to request 
> specific layers 
> > compositions using some parameters which are not specified, this is 
> > not for SVC but should be a separate draft that may expand 
> the image 
> > attribute draft in MMUSIC.
> > 
> > Roni Even as individual
> > 
> > 
> > 
> >> -----Original Message-----
> >> From: avt-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:avt-bounces@ietf.org] 
> On Behalf Of 
> >> Tom Taylor
> >> Sent: Sunday, December 13, 2009 6:47 PM
> >> To: IETF AVT WG
> >> Subject: [AVT] SVC and multiscreen
> >> 
> >> Given that SVC hasn't quite been put to bed, I would like 
> to draw the 
> >> WG's attention to draft-nanwang-avt-svc-multiscreen-00.txt.
> >> 
> >> The original intention of the author was that this text be added to
> > the
> >> SVC
> >> draft. Could I ask for comment from the WG on whether that is 
> >> sensible or whether it is better to develop a separate document? 
> >> Further: how does this relate to draft-wang-avt-rtp-mvc, which was 
> >> agreed to be a WG item at the Dublin meeting once the SVC work was 
> >> done?
> >> 
> >> Tom Taylor
> >> 
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> Audio/Video Transport Working Group
> >> avt@ietf.org
> >> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/avt
> > 
> > _______________________________________________
> > Audio/Video Transport Working Group
> > avt@ietf.org
> > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/avt
> > _______________________________________________
> > Audio/Video Transport Working Group
> > avt@ietf.org
> > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/avt
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Audio/Video Transport Working Group
> avt@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/avt
> 