Re: [clue] FW: draft-ejzak-mmusic-data-channel-sdpneg and draft-ejzak-mmusic-msrp-usage-data-channel

["Makaraju, Maridi Raju (Raju)" <[e-mail]>]

Hi Christer, Christian, Mary,

Thanks for the offer to help.
However, past delays were not related to authoring of the technical details of the document, but rather editorial delays.
We now rectified that problem and from now on changes will be done in a timely manner.

As always, we appreciate the strong support and help we are received (especially from Paul and Christer) in reviewing these documents.

Thanks and Best Regards!
Raju for “draft-ejzak-mmusic-data-channel-sdpneg “ and “draft-ejzak-mmusic-msrp-usage-data-channel” members.



From: clue [mailto:[e-mail]] On Behalf Of Christer Holmberg
Sent: Tuesday, October 28, 2014 7:52 AM
To: Mary Barnes; Christian Groves
Cc: CLUE
Subject: Re: [clue] FW: draft-ejzak-mmusic-data-channel-sdpneg and draft-ejzak-mmusic-msrp-usage-data-channel

Hi,

I would be willing to help the author(s), if they need help :)

Of course, SDP attributes (which the draft technically is all about) can also be defined elsewhere, if MMUSIC think they are too busy.

Regards,

Christer

From: clue [mailto:[e-mail]] On Behalf Of Mary Barnes
Sent: 28. lokakuuta 2014 14:40
To: Christian Groves
Cc: CLUE
Subject: Re: [clue] FW: draft-ejzak-mmusic-data-channel-sdpneg and draft-ejzak-mmusic-msrp-usage-data-channel

Okay. So, if folks really want this for CLUE, then we MUST make sure to support the work on the MMUSIC WG mailing list.   As I said, my primary concern is timing. If the current author doesn't have the cycles (or needs help), would anyone here be willing to step in as a co-author (if the doc is agreed as a WG document) to ensure the work actually gets done?

Thanks,
Mary

On Mon, Oct 27, 2014 at 7:32 PM, Christian Groves <[e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>> wrote:
Like Christer, I also think the mechanism would be useful. Actually I think its essential when it comes to endpoints (especially gateways) supporting multiple protocols in a data channel. So I hope that MMUSIC does accept the draft. If it does become a general mechanism I think we have to consider it in our CLUE work.

Christian

On 28/10/2014 6:05 AM, Mary Barnes wrote:
When we discussed this at IETF-90, we said that we would consider it if the updated document was submitted no later than September 1st (per the minutes).  Of course, that date wasn't met.  My suggestion is that if there is consensus to adopt this as an MMUSIC WG deliverable, we could add a reference. BUT, I would still be concerned about delays in that work that would result in CLUE documents sitting in the RFC editor's queue waiting for that document.

As an individual, considering the overall pace of the work on that document thus far, I would be quite worried about adding that as a dependency.

Regards,
Mary.

On Mon, Oct 27, 2014 at 1:26 PM, Christer Holmberg <[e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]> <mailto:[e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>>> wrote:

    FYI,

    Keith has submitted a new version of the SDP-data-channel-neg draft.

    Personally I think the mechanism would be useful, but I think it
    would be good to have a "CLUE opinion" also. Currently we only
    have an editor's note saying that we may consider the mechanism
    depending on how it progresses. But, as we know, nothing
    progresses by itself in IETF, so the question is whether we shall
    say "CLUE has an interest in this mechanism, and would like it to
    move forward".

    Regards,

    Christer


    -----Original Message-----
    From: mmusic [mailto:[e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>
    <mailto:[e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>>] On Behalf Of DRAGE, Keith (Keith)
    Sent: 27 October 2014 16:39
    To: [e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]> <mailto:[e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>>
    Subject: [MMUSIC] draft-ejzak-mmusic-data-channel-sdpneg and
    draft-ejzak-mmusic-msrp-usage-data-channel

    Based on the discussion on list over the last few days, I have
    submitted revised versions of the two SDP negotiation over data
    channel drafts as follows:

    A new version of I-D, draft-ejzak-mmusic-data-channel-sdpneg-02.txt
    has been successfully submitted by Keith Drage and posted to the
    IETF repository.

    Name:           draft-ejzak-mmusic-data-channel-sdpneg
    Revision:       02
    Title:          SDP-based "SCTP over DTLS" data channel negotiation
    Document date:  2014-10-27
    Group:          Individual Submission
    Pages:          22
    URL:
    http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ejzak-mmusic-data-channel-sdpneg-02.txt
    Status:
    https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ejzak-mmusic-data-channel-sdpneg/
    Htmlized:
    http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ejzak-mmusic-data-channel-sdpneg-02
    Diff:
    http://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=draft-ejzak-mmusic-data-channel-sdpneg-02

    Abstract:
       The Real-Time Communication in WEB-browsers (RTCWeb) working
    group is
       charged to provide protocols to support direct interactive rich
       communications using audio, video, and data between two peers' web-
       browsers.  For the support of data communication, the RTCWeb
    working
       group has in particular defined the concept of bi-directional data
       channels over SCTP, where each data channel might be used to
       transport other protocols, called sub-protocols. Data channel setup
       can be done using either the internal in-band band (also
    referred to
       as 'internal' for the rest of the document) WebRTC Data Channel
       Establishment Protocol or some external out-of-band simply referred
       to as 'external negotiation' in the rest of the document . This
       document specifies how the SDP offer/answer exchange can be used to
       achieve such an external negotiation.  Even though data
    channels are
       designed for RTCWeb use initially they may be used by other
    protocols
       like, but not limited to, the CLUE protocol.  This document is
       intended to be used wherever data channels are used.


    A new version of I-D,
    draft-ejzak-mmusic-msrp-usage-data-channel-01.txt
    has been successfully submitted by Keith Drage and posted to the
    IETF repository.

    Name:  draft-ejzak-mmusic-msrp-usage-data-channel
    Revision:       01
    Title:          MSRP over SCTP/DTLS data channels
    Document date:  2014-10-27
    Group:          Individual Submission
    Pages:          11
    URL:
    http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ejzak-mmusic-msrp-usage-data-channel-01.txt
    Status:
    https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ejzak-mmusic-msrp-usage-data-channel/
    Htmlized:
    http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ejzak-mmusic-msrp-usage-data-channel-01
    Diff:
    http://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=draft-ejzak-mmusic-msrp-usage-data-channel-01

    Abstract:
       This document specifies how the Message Session Relay Protocol
    (MSRP)
       can be instantiated as a data channel sub-protocol, using the
    the SDP
       offer/answer exchange-based external negotiation defined in
       [I-D.ejzak-mmusic-data-channel-sdpneg].  Two network configurations
       are documented: a WebRTC end-to-end configuration (connecting two
       MSRP over data channel endpoints), and a gateway configuration
       (connecting an MSRP over data channel endpoint with an MSRP
    over TCP
       endpoint).
    _______________________________________________
    mmusic mailing list
    [e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]> <mailto:[e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>>
    https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mmusic

    _______________________________________________
    clue mailing list
    [e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]> <mailto:[e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>>
    https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/clue




_______________________________________________
clue mailing list
[e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/clue

_______________________________________________
clue mailing list
[e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/clue