[AVT] Re: WG Action: RECHARTER: Audio/Video Transport (avt)
Colin Perkins <csp@csperkins.org> Wed, 08 October 2003 16:35 UTC
Received: from optimus.ietf.org (ietf.org [132.151.1.19] (may be forged)) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id MAA26601 for <avt-archive@odin.ietf.org>; Wed, 8 Oct 2003 12:35:26 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1A7HHF-0000xF-IO for avt-archive@odin.ietf.org; Wed, 08 Oct 2003 12:35:06 -0400
Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id h98GZ5AJ003663 for avt-archive@odin.ietf.org; Wed, 8 Oct 2003 12:35:05 -0400
Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1A7HHD-0000wi-DY; Wed, 08 Oct 2003 12:35:03 -0400
Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1A7HGz-0000vY-Ln for avt@optimus.ietf.org; Wed, 08 Oct 2003 12:34:49 -0400
Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id MAA26568 for <avt@ietf.org>; Wed, 8 Oct 2003 12:34:39 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1A7HGx-0000pN-00 for avt@ietf.org; Wed, 08 Oct 2003 12:34:47 -0400
Received: from dundee.dcs.gla.ac.uk ([130.209.242.163]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1A7HGx-0000op-00 for avt@ietf.org; Wed, 08 Oct 2003 12:34:47 -0400
Received: from bisa ([130.209.247.104]:57818 helo=csperkins.org) by dundee.dcs.gla.ac.uk with asmtp (TLSv1:DES-CBC3-SHA:168) (Exim 4.04) id 1A7HGQ-0007gl-00; Wed, 08 Oct 2003 17:34:15 +0100
Date: Wed, 08 Oct 2003 17:34:09 +0100
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"; format="flowed"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v552)
Cc: avt@ietf.org, Magnus Westerlund <magnus.westerlund@ericsson.com>
To: Mark Baugher <mark@mbaugher.com>
From: Colin Perkins <csp@csperkins.org>
In-Reply-To: <6.0.0.22.2.20031008085425.035fcd48@agora.rdrop.com>
Message-Id: <3DD2B775-F9AD-11D7-A082-000A957FC5F2@csperkins.org>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.552)
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Subject: [AVT] Re: WG Action: RECHARTER: Audio/Video Transport (avt)
Sender: avt-admin@ietf.org
Errors-To: avt-admin@ietf.org
X-BeenThere: avt@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12
Precedence: bulk
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/avt>, <mailto:avt-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Id: Audio/Video Transport Working Group <avt.ietf.org>
List-Post: <mailto:avt@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:avt-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/avt>, <mailto:avt-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Mark, I fully agree with your assessment. You'll note that the new charter says that we will "consider" updating the MIB; the issues you mention are those we should work through in the next year or so, to make a decision on how to proceed and if there is sufficient community to do the work. The first stage is probably to identify a volunteer to look into these issues... Colin On Wednesday, Oct 8, 2003, at 17:04 Europe/London, Mark Baugher wrote: > I see that we want to advance the RTP MIB to draft standard. At > minimum, I think we will want to consider updating the RTP MIB for > SRTP. This is also an opportunity to review > ftp://ftp.rfc-editor.org/in-notes/rfc2959.txt and try to ascertain > if/how the RTP MIB is used in products or tools. This MIB was > reference by the ITU for H.323 management and there were a number of > technical issues in trying to balance multicast uses with > pairwise/unicast uses of the RTP MIB. > > I think we will need to find a constituency who have products that use > the RTP MIB, or need to, and who will drive the effort just as the ITU > folks drove the original MIB effort. To my knowledge, many of the > individuals who led this effort are now doing other things and I don't > know of any product implementations of the RTP MIB (is videoserver > corp even around anymore, it looks like a web commerce site?). > > Although we only need two interoperable implementations for draft > status, this could be complex since interoperability is bifurcated > between pairwise/unicast and multicast types of applications. > > Mark > > At 08:26 AM 10/8/2003, The IESG wrote: >> The charter of the Audio/Video Transport (avt) working group in >> Transport Area of the IETF has been updated. For additional >> information, >> please contact the Area Directors or the working group Chairs. >> >> Audio/Video Transport (avt) >> --------------------------- >> >> Current Status: Active Working Group >> >> Chair(s): >> Colin Perkins <csp@csperkins.org> >> Magnus Westerlund <magnus.westerlund@ericsson.com> >> >> Transport Area Director(s): >> Allison Mankin <mankin@psg.com> >> Jon Peterson <jon.peterson@neustar.biz> >> >> Transport Area Advisor: >> Allison Mankin <mankin@psg.com> >> >> Mailing Lists: >> General Discussion: avt@ietf.org >> To Subscribe: avt-request@ietf.org >> Archive: >> www.ietf.org/mail-archive/working-groups/avt/current/maillist.html >> >> The Audio/Video Transport Working Group was formed to specify a >> protocol for real-time transmission of audio and video over unicast >> and multicast UDP/IP. This is the Real-time Transport Protocol, RTP, >> together with its associated profiles and payload formats. The >> current aims of the working group are: >> >> - to advance the main RTP specification and RTP Profile >> for Audio and Video Conferences with Minimal Control >> for publication as full Internet Standards >> >> - to review and revise existing payload formats to advance those >> which are useful to Draft Standard, and to declare others >> as Historic. Milestones will be established as a champion for >> each payload format is identified. >> >> - to develop payload formats for new media codecs, and to >> document best-current practices in payload format design. >> The group continues to be precluded from work on codecs >> themselves because of overlap with the other standards >> bodies, and because the IETF does not have the ability >> to effectively review new codecs. An exception was made >> for the freeware iLBC codec on a highly experimental basis, >> but acceptance of new codec work is unexpected and subject >> to rechartering. >> >> - to complete the forward error correction work in the ULP and >> UXP payload formats >> >> - to extend RTP to work with Source-Specific Multicast sessions >> with unicast feedback >> >> - to provide a framing mechanism for RTP over TCP and TLS >> >> - to review the applicability of Compressed RTP operation on >> MPLS networks, developing extensions as necessary >> >> - to develop a new RTP profile as the combination of the SRTP >> profile and the Extended RTP Profile for RTCP-based Feedback >> (RTP/SAVPF) >> >> The group will also coordinate with the DCCP working group to >> ensure that RTP can be efficiently transported over DCCP. >> >> The longer term goals of the working group are to advance the >> SRTP Profile, the Extended RTP Profile for RTCP-based Feedback, >> the Compressed RTP framework, and the RTP MIB to Draft Standard. >> >> The group has no plans to develop new RTP profiles beyond those >> listed above, but will consider rechartering to produce profile >> level extensions if appropriate. >> >> Milestones: >> >> Oct 2003 Review DCCP including prototypes and API; feedback to DCCP >> WG >> Nov 2003 Initial draft requirements for ECRTP over MPLS; discuss >> with MPLS WG >> Dec 2003 Submit UXP Payload Format for Proposed Standard >> Dec 2003 Submit ULP Payload Format for Proposed Standard >> Dec 2003 Submit RTCP/SSM draft for Proposed Standard >> Dec 2003 Submit iLBC codec specification for Experimental >> Dec 2003 Submit iLBC payload format for Proposed Standard >> Jan 2004 Advance RTP specification and A/V profile to Full Standard >> Mar 2004 Submit Framing of RTP for TCP and TLS for Proposed Standard >> Mar 2004 Identify payload formats to classify as Historic >> Mar 2004 Finish requirements for ECRTP over MPLS; >> recharter for subsequent work >> Jul 2004 Submit RTP/SAVPF profile for Proposed Standard >> Jul 2004 Begin update of SRTP profile for Draft Standard RFC >> Jul 2004 Begin update of RTP/AVPF profile for Draft Standard RFC >> Aug 2004 Consider update of RTP MIB >> Nov 2004 Collect SRTP implementation reports >> Nov 2004 Collect RTP/AVPF implementation reports >> Mar 2005 Submit SRTP for Draft Standard >> Mar 2005 Submit RTP/AVPF for Draft Standard > > -- Colin Perkins http://csperkins.org/ _______________________________________________ Audio/Video Transport Working Group avt@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/avt
- [AVT] WG Action: RECHARTER: Audio/Video Transport… The IESG
- [AVT] Re: WG Action: RECHARTER: Audio/Video Trans… Colin Perkins
- [AVT] Re: WG Action: RECHARTER: Audio/Video Trans… Mark Baugher
- [AVT] MIB based on RTCP XR VoIP metrics Alan Clark
- Re: [AVT] MIB based on RTCP XR VoIP metrics Mark Baugher
- RE: [AVT] MIB based on RTCP XR VoIP metrics Alan Clark
- Anybody use the RTP MIB? (was RE: [AVT] MIB based… Mark Baugher
- [AVT] WG Action: RECHARTER: Audio/Video Transport… The IESG
- [AVT] WG Action: RECHARTER: Audio/Video Transport… IESG Secretary
- [AVT] WG Action: RECHARTER: Audio/Video Transport… IESG Secretary