Re: [bfcpbis] I-D Action: draft-ietf-bfcpbis-bfcp-websocket-05.txt

"Gonzalo Salgueiro (gsalguei)" <gsalguei@cisco.com> Wed, 10 February 2016 18:33 UTC

Return-Path: <gsalguei@cisco.com>
X-Original-To: bfcpbis@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: bfcpbis@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A5DCE1ACE31 for <bfcpbis@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 10 Feb 2016 10:33:49 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -14.502
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-14.502 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, USER_IN_DEF_DKIM_WL=-7.5] autolearn=ham
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id VWfoyperOwKB for <bfcpbis@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 10 Feb 2016 10:33:47 -0800 (PST)
Received: from alln-iport-4.cisco.com (alln-iport-4.cisco.com [173.37.142.91]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-SEED-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 5824F1B2C53 for <bfcpbis@ietf.org>; Wed, 10 Feb 2016 10:33:47 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=@cisco.com; l=9932; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1455129227; x=1456338827; h=from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:references: in-reply-to:content-id:content-transfer-encoding: mime-version; bh=xncaIitU4MEzb/wk7GtO303qP6febuVLW10o5h8C3o4=; b=Vg8VyaFcDrhJo6CS5WyKbVF3rzEsoROqwGS82FHl2MJjw8EdkHHetSQr fzatWSl5TIn/ds0yT4LO/+NIk+H5YZz8GOmblmhFtmMqJaEIv5zZKlTMv LN5CPTZADppSm015opWMiQz5uYgfr9UU2BWcezyuuNnum3753S1uNk3gq M=;
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: =?us-ascii?q?A0D+AQCDgbtW/49dJa1eDoMsUm0GiFaxI?= =?us-ascii?q?gENgWYXCoUiSgIcgSE4FAEBAQEBAQGBCoRBAQEBAwEBAQEgEToLBQcEAgEIEQM?= =?us-ascii?q?BAQEBAgIjAwICAiULFAEICAIEAQ0FiBMIDrFrjmsBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBA?= =?us-ascii?q?QEBAQEVe4UXAYFsgkqESIJqK4EPBZZ4AYVLiAWBXEqDeYhVim2DUQEeAQFCgyk?= =?us-ascii?q?7aodXfAEBAQ?=
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.22,426,1449532800"; d="scan'208";a="236207622"
Received: from rcdn-core-7.cisco.com ([173.37.93.143]) by alln-iport-4.cisco.com with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 10 Feb 2016 18:33:41 +0000
Received: from XCH-ALN-020.cisco.com (xch-aln-020.cisco.com [173.36.7.30]) by rcdn-core-7.cisco.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id u1AIXelN024943 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=FAIL); Wed, 10 Feb 2016 18:33:41 GMT
Received: from xch-aln-009.cisco.com (173.36.7.19) by XCH-ALN-020.cisco.com (173.36.7.30) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1104.5; Wed, 10 Feb 2016 12:33:40 -0600
Received: from xch-aln-009.cisco.com ([173.36.7.19]) by XCH-ALN-009.cisco.com ([173.36.7.19]) with mapi id 15.00.1104.009; Wed, 10 Feb 2016 12:33:40 -0600
From: "Gonzalo Salgueiro (gsalguei)" <gsalguei@cisco.com>
To: "pkyzivat@alum.mit.edu" <pkyzivat@alum.mit.edu>, "Suhas Nandakumar (snandaku)" <snandaku@cisco.com>
Thread-Topic: [bfcpbis] I-D Action: draft-ietf-bfcpbis-bfcp-websocket-05.txt
Thread-Index: AQHRBdZW9p6Pt0dHI0G5J5gRtUWM655p+f6AgDBfdwCAAS0sAIB/icyAgAmmyoCAAIfWgIAABQYAgAF3+IA=
Date: Wed, 10 Feb 2016 18:33:40 +0000
Message-ID: <B3EA2EA2-79DD-438C-AA25-9FDFB580D519@cisco.com>
References: <20151013164348.9920.89287.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> <6D74D935-2204-49AD-9CDA-D432A74BD477@cisco.com> <D26B6E1C.5EAA1%eckelcu@cisco.com> <D26CBA43.490B0%rmohanr@cisco.com> <D2D7B752.501D2%rmohanr@cisco.com> <D2DF8092.663D0%eckelcu@cisco.com> <A01A06CB-BCAE-45E8-9DF2-2F2F41005143@cisco.com> <7594FB04B1934943A5C02806D1A2204B37DC990A@ESESSMB209.ericsson.se>
In-Reply-To: <7594FB04B1934943A5C02806D1A2204B37DC990A@ESESSMB209.ericsson.se>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-ms-exchange-messagesentrepresentingtype: 1
x-ms-exchange-transport-fromentityheader: Hosted
x-originating-ip: [10.82.240.243]
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-ID: <905100E25DA7F5439B7664434B227459@emea.cisco.com>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64
MIME-Version: 1.0
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/bfcpbis/0UmOFoZ_PDGGxpbo3p5au8QlmU0>
Cc: "Ram Mohan R \(rmohanr\)" <rmohanr@cisco.com>, "bfcpbis@ietf.org" <bfcpbis@ietf.org>, "bfcpbis-chairs@tools.ietf.org" <bfcpbis-chairs@tools.ietf.org>, "Charles Eckel \(eckelcu\)" <eckelcu@cisco.com>, Christer Holmberg <christer.holmberg@ericsson.com>
Subject: Re: [bfcpbis] I-D Action: draft-ietf-bfcpbis-bfcp-websocket-05.txt
X-BeenThere: bfcpbis@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: BFCPBIS working group discussion list <bfcpbis.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/bfcpbis>, <mailto:bfcpbis-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/bfcpbis/>
List-Post: <mailto:bfcpbis@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:bfcpbis-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/bfcpbis>, <mailto:bfcpbis-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 10 Feb 2016 18:33:49 -0000

Paul/Suhas - 

Could you share your thoughts on this so we know what document updates are required.

Thanks,

Gonzalo


> On Feb 9, 2016, at 3:08 PM, Christer Holmberg <christer.holmberg@ericsson.com> wrote:
> 
> Hi,
> 
> In general I am fine with the latest versions of the draft.
> 
> However, in draft-ram-bfcpbis-sdp-ws-uri I think the mux category needs to be specified for the new SDP attributes.
> 
> Now, as I assume the attributes will never be used in a mux scenario, the question is which category shall be used. Suhas/Paul? NOT RECOMMENDED?
> 
> Regards,
> 
> Christer
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Gonzalo Salgueiro (gsalguei) [mailto:gsalguei@cisco.com] 
> Sent: 09 February 2016 21:50
> To: Charles Eckel (eckelcu) <eckelcu@cisco.com>
> Cc: Ram Mohan R (rmohanr) <rmohanr@cisco.com>om>; bfcpbis@ietf.org; Christer Holmberg <christer.holmberg@ericsson.com>om>; bfcpbis-chairs@tools.ietf.org
> Subject: Re: [bfcpbis] I-D Action: draft-ietf-bfcpbis-bfcp-websocket-05.txt
> 
> Thanks, Charles.
> 
> We’re awaiting sign-off from Christer that his points on both drafts are properly addressed.  Once that happens there are no more open issues.
> 
> Two comments:
> 
> - We think draft-ietf-bfcpbis-bfcp-websocket is ready for WGLC
> - We’d appreciate some direction from the chairs on how to move forward the new draft (draft-ram-bfcpbis-sdp-ws-uri) that was spawned from this effort, which we also believe is ready for WGLC.
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Gonzalo
> 
> 
> 
>> On Feb 9, 2016, at 2:43 PM, Charles Eckel (eckelcu) <eckelcu@cisco.com> wrote:
>> 
>> Ram and other draft authors,
>> 
>> Thanks for updating and posting the revised draft ( https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-bfcpbis-bfcp-websocket-06 ). 
>> I would like to poll the working group to see if people think this draft is now ready for WGLC.
>> 
>> Thanks,
>> Charles
>> 
>> On 2/3/16, 12:20 AM, "Ram Mohan R (rmohanr)" <rmohanr@cisco.com> wrote:
>> 
>>> Hi Charles / WG,
>>> 
>>> We have published a new revision of draft-ietf-bfcpbis-bfcp-websocket 
>>> and also draft-ram-bfcpbis-sdp-ws-uri which addresses the comments 
>>> given by Christer
>>> (https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/bfcpbis/S_MlYOJz-kkE3yLu5IANL9
>>> 3ndmM)
>>> 
>>> Regards,
>>> Ram
>>> 
>>> 
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: bfcpbis <bfcpbis-bounces@ietf.org> on behalf of Cisco Employee 
>>> <rmohanr@cisco.com>
>>> Date: Saturday, 14 November 2015 at 10:12 AM
>>> To: "Charles Eckel (eckelcu)" <eckelcu@cisco.com>om>, "Gonzalo Salgueiro 
>>> (gsalguei)" <gsalguei@cisco.com>om>, "bfcpbis@ietf.org" 
>>> <bfcpbis@ietf.org>rg>, "christer.holmberg@ericsson.com" 
>>> <christer.holmberg@ericsson.com>
>>> Cc: "bfcpbis-chairs@tools.ietf.org" <bfcpbis-chairs@tools.ietf.org>
>>> Subject: Re: [bfcpbis] I-D Action: 
>>> draft-ietf-bfcpbis-bfcp-websocket-05.txt
>>> 
>>>> Hi Charles,
>>>> 
>>>> I will get back with responses and updated diffs to 
>>>> draft-ram-bfcpbis-sdp-ws-uri soon. I agree that we should wait till 
>>>> this is resolved before looking to start WGLC.
>>>> 
>>>> Regards,
>>>> Ram
>>>> 
>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>> From: "Charles Eckel (eckelcu)" <eckelcu@cisco.com>
>>>> Date: Saturday, 14 November 2015 12:14 am
>>>> To: "Gonzalo Salgueiro (gsalguei)" <gsalguei@cisco.com>om>, 
>>>> "bfcpbis@ietf.org" <bfcpbis@ietf.org>rg>, "christer.holmberg@ericsson.com"
>>>> <christer.holmberg@ericsson.com>
>>>> Cc: "bfcpbis-chairs@tools.ietf.org" <bfcpbis-chairs@tools.ietf.org>rg>, 
>>>> Cisco Employee <rmohanr@cisco.com>
>>>> Subject: Re: [bfcpbis] I-D Action:
>>>> draft-ietf-bfcpbis-bfcp-websocket-05.txt
>>>> 
>>>>> Christer reviewed draft-ram-bfcpbis-sdp-ws-uri and recommended 
>>>>> substantial changes to it. The authors have not yet responded to 
>>>>> that.
>>>>> 
>>>>> Regarding draft-ietf-bfcpbis-bfcp-websocket, I¹d like to see this 
>>>>> response and potential impacts on either/both drafts before 
>>>>> starting WGLC for draft-ietf-bfcpbis-bfcp-websocket.
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> Cheers,
>>>>> Charles
>>>>> 
>>>>> On 10/13/15, 10:02 AM, "bfcpbis on behalf of Gonzalo Salgueiro 
>>>>> (gsalguei)"
>>>>> <bfcpbis-bounces@ietf.org on behalf of gsalguei@cisco.com> wrote:
>>>>> 
>>>>>> New version of the draft has been published and addresses all open 
>>>>>> comments raised by Christer.  At this point authors feel this is 
>>>>>> ready for WGLC.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> There is a pending request for Christer to review the 
>>>>>> complementary draft he requested
>>>>>> (draft-ram-bfcpbis-sdp-ws-uri-00) be split off from the original 
>>>>>> document. Once this is done, we ask the chairs for guidance on how 
>>>>>> best to progress this spin-off draft.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Gonzalo
>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> On Oct 13, 2015, at 12:43 PM, internet-drafts@ietf.org wrote:
>>>>>>> A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line 
>>>>>>> Internet-Drafts directories.
>>>>>>> This draft is a work item of the Binary Floor Control Protocol 
>>>>>>> Bis Working Group of the IETF.
>>>>>>>        Title           : The WebSocket Protocol as a Transport for the
>>>>>>> Binary Floor Control Protocol (BFCP)
>>>>>>>        Authors         : Victor Pascual
>>>>>>>                          Antón Román
>>>>>>>                          Stéphane Cazeaux
>>>>>>>                          Gonzalo Salgueiro
>>>>>>>                          Ram Mohan Ravindranath
>>>>>>>                          Sergio Garcia Murillo
>>>>>>> Filename        : draft-ietf-bfcpbis-bfcp-websocket-05.txt
>>>>>>> Pages           : 14
>>>>>>> Date            : 2015-10-13
>>>>>>> Abstract:
>>>>>>>   The WebSocket protocol enables two-way realtime communication 
>>>>>>> between
>>>>>>>   clients and servers.  This document specifies a new WebSocket sub-
>>>>>>>   protocol as a reliable transport mechanism between Binary Floor
>>>>>>>   Control Protocol (BFCP) entities to enable usage of BFCP in new
>>>>>>>   scenarios.
>>>>>>> The IETF datatracker status page for this draft is:
>>>>>>> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-bfcpbis-bfcp-websocke
>>>>>>> t/ There's also a htmlized version available at:
>>>>>>> https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-bfcpbis-bfcp-websocket-05
>>>>>>> A diff from the previous version is available at:
>>>>>>> https://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=draft-ietf-bfcpbis-bfcp-websock
>>>>>>> et-05 Please note that it may take a couple of minutes from the 
>>>>>>> time of submission until the htmlized version and diff are 
>>>>>>> available at tools.ietf.org.
>>>>>>> Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP at:
>>>>>>> ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/
>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>> bfcpbis mailing list
>>>>>>> bfcpbis@ietf.org
>>>>>>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/bfcpbis
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>> bfcpbis mailing list
>>>>>> bfcpbis@ietf.org
>>>>>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/bfcpbis
>>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> bfcpbis mailing list
>>>> bfcpbis@ietf.org
>>>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/bfcpbis
>>> 
>>> 
>