Re: [AVT] accepting draft-begen-avt-rtp-cnames-02 as a WG document

Me as well.
Stephan

On 6.4.2010 08:11 , "Van Caenegem, Tom (Tom)"
<tom.van_caenegem@alcatel-lucent.com> wrote:

> Roni,
>  
> I support this work,
> Tom
> 
> 
> From: avt-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:avt-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Roni
> Even
> Sent: vrijdag 4 juni 2010 17:07
> To: 'IETF AVT WG'
> Subject: [AVT] accepting draft-begen-avt-rtp-cnames-02 as a WG document
> 
> Hi,
> In Section 6.5.1 of RFC3550, there are a number of recommendations for
> choosing a unique RTCP CNAME for an RTP endpoint.  However, in  practice, some
> of these methods are not guaranteed to produce a  unique CNAME.
> http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-begen-avt-rtp-cnames-02 proposes updated
> guidelines for choosing CNAMEs, superseding those presented in Section 6.5.1
> of [RFC3550].
>  
> This was recognized as an issue to solve in the last IETF meetings.
>  
> The AVT chairs would like to ask if the group feels that this document should
> be accepted as a starting point for the working group document for resolving
> the issue.
>  
> Please send any comments till June 12th
>  
> Thanks
> Roni Even
> AVT co-chair
>  
>  
>  
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Audio/Video Transport Working Group
> avt@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/avt