IETF Logo Mail Archive

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

Peter Musgrave <peter.musgrave@magorcorp.com> Fri, 04 June 2010 17:02 UTC

Return-Path: <peter.musgrave@magorcorp.com>
X-Original-To: avt@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: avt@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B9F623A68FD for <avt@core3.amsl.com>; Fri, 4 Jun 2010 10:02:59 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: 0.137
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.137 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.255, BAYES_20=-0.74, FM_FORGED_GMAIL=0.622]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id yeCttoSx2I+9 for <avt@core3.amsl.com>; Fri, 4 Jun 2010 10:02:58 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-gw0-f44.google.com (mail-gw0-f44.google.com [74.125.83.44]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B27803A69D4 for <avt@ietf.org>; Fri, 4 Jun 2010 10:02:57 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by gwb11 with SMTP id 11so1059763gwb.31 for <avt@ietf.org>; Fri, 04 Jun 2010 10:02:38 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.150.244.10 with SMTP id r10mr264684ybh.414.1275670958088; Fri, 04 Jun 2010 10:02:38 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.150.195.8 with HTTP; Fri, 4 Jun 2010 10:02:38 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <EE933D92D054D14089A336CC71A5CCA60175D19F@XMB-RCD-213.cisco.com>
References: <EC3FD58E75D43A4F8807FDE0749175460A2DF1BB@FRMRSSXCHMBSB1.dc-m.alcatel-lucent.com> <C82E6780.21EAF%stewe@stewe.org> <76AC5FEF83F1E64491446437EA81A61F7CF49FACDE@srvxchg> <EE933D92D054D14089A336CC71A5CCA60175D19F@XMB-RCD-213.cisco.com>
Date: Fri, 04 Jun 2010 13:02:38 -0400
Message-ID: <AANLkTimLE95xQXnwubV3bAnKRg3q5p_eMGZcscwJPfb8@mail.gmail.com>
From: Peter Musgrave <peter.musgrave@magorcorp.com>
To: "Bill Ver Steeg (versteb)" <versteb@cisco.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Cc: Jean-Francois Mule <jf.mule@cablelabs.com>, Stephan Wenger <stewe@stewe.org>, IETF AVT WG <avt@ietf.org>, Roni Even <Even.roni@huawei.com>
Subject: Re: [AVT] accepting draft-begen-avt-rtp-cnames-02 as a WG document
X-BeenThere: avt@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: Audio/Video Transport Working Group <avt.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/avt>, <mailto:avt-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/avt>
List-Post: <mailto:avt@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:avt-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/avt>, <mailto:avt-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 04 Jun 2010 17:02:59 -0000

+1

On Fri, Jun 4, 2010 at 11:26 AM, Bill Ver Steeg (versteb)
<versteb@cisco.com> wrote:
> I also support this work.
>
>
>
> Bill VerSteeg
>
>
>
> From: avt-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:avt-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of
> Jean-Francois Mule
> Sent: Friday, June 04, 2010 11:23 AM
> To: Stephan Wenger; Van Caenegem, Tom (Tom); Roni Even; 'IETF AVT WG'
>
> Subject: Re: [AVT] accepting draft-begen-avt-rtp-cnames-02 as a WG document
>
>
>
> I also support this work.
>
>
>
> Jean-Francois.
>
>
>
> From: avt-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:avt-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of
> Stephan Wenger
> Sent: Friday, June 04, 2010 9:19 AM
> To: Van Caenegem, Tom (Tom); Roni Even; 'IETF AVT WG'
> Subject: 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
>
> _______________________________________________
> Audio/Video Transport Working Group
> avt@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/avt
>
>

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email