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

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