Re: [clue] Requirements are now an RFC!!
Mary Barnes <mary.ietf.barnes@gmail.com> Fri, 18 April 2014 12:50 UTC
Return-Path: <mary.ietf.barnes@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: clue@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: clue@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1AD691A01D4 for <clue@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 18 Apr 2014 05:50:18 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.999
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.999 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] 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 7qmOyx8cR909 for <clue@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 18 Apr 2014 05:50:13 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-we0-x235.google.com (mail-we0-x235.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:400c:c03::235]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A78511A01BB for <clue@ietf.org>; Fri, 18 Apr 2014 05:50:12 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-we0-f181.google.com with SMTP id q58so1515805wes.40 for <clue@ietf.org>; Fri, 18 Apr 2014 05:50:08 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type; bh=q+BoCpew97hMxx59/MPMxDJEGv7WTbpkfHYNjHc0gG4=; b=dryTx0A75nfbbMCSvjKdJiOAqK1Uxeu53lYaavbh96+1eTS6Uj1gcPtkwEl88R1S0W Yjr65vQRYaPQNz44Jn5d+CQhOiRDC4s/yNZQJgy6R4eovw3Z69dQGs2OdBKePNVdRzmz Pusjh/gJ2VGuV13KvjdspIYCUGj9FWmF6bKcxi1nJv62gQOVqAE72QduAGpSFe+7DYTZ y8LaRySBAAg9SmexUqUmpwRt3oYSm19YMYyGQUqJDQ5HZoICq1g0g0UZy3koSa+9tqip zrUWBZR11jRlA/g+8TY5hPXMNIbkuK2zZ1bnOxYv9lQ2CoPwDXpOjdQUrqhND+lxGmve VdBw==
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.194.86.7 with SMTP id l7mr16099194wjz.37.1397825408275; Fri, 18 Apr 2014 05:50:08 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.216.10.6 with HTTP; Fri, 18 Apr 2014 05:50:08 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <5350943D.6080600@alum.mit.edu>
References: <20140417230301.5294A18000C@rfc-editor.org> <5350943D.6080600@alum.mit.edu>
Date: Fri, 18 Apr 2014 07:50:08 -0500
Message-ID: <CAHBDyN4WiUuGPTwOJaECLB-9bO27XAiBaFxr8LL=00h8zyDCTw@mail.gmail.com>
From: Mary Barnes <mary.ietf.barnes@gmail.com>
To: Paul Kyzivat <pkyzivat@alum.mit.edu>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="089e0102e4f0eb1d0a04f7509693"
Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/clue/ruSmoLmUvbOcDF7Hl5uUyPjc-dI
Cc: CLUE <clue@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [clue] Requirements are now an RFC!!
X-BeenThere: clue@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: CLUE - ControLling mUltiple streams for TElepresence <clue.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/clue>, <mailto:clue-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/clue/>
List-Post: <mailto:clue@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:clue-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/clue>, <mailto:clue-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 18 Apr 2014 12:50:18 -0000
No. It's the use cases that have just been published. The requirements document is still in the RFC Editor's queue. On Thu, Apr 17, 2014 at 9:55 PM, Paul Kyzivat <pkyzivat@alum.mit.edu> wrote: > On 4/17/14 7:03 PM, rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org wrote: > >> A new Request for Comments is now available in online RFC libraries. >> >> >> RFC 7205 >> >> Title: Use Cases for Telepresence Multistreams >> Author: A. Romanow, S. Botzko, >> M. Duckworth, R. Even, Ed. >> Status: Informational >> Stream: IETF >> Date: April 2014 >> Mailbox: allyn@cisco.com, >> stephen.botzko@polycom.com, >> mark.duckworth@polycom.com, >> roni.even@mail01.huawei.com >> Pages: 17 >> Characters: 42087 >> Updates/Obsoletes/SeeAlso: None >> >> I-D Tag: draft-ietf-clue-telepresence-use-cases-09.txt >> >> URL: http://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc7205.txt >> >> Telepresence conferencing systems seek to create an environment that >> gives users (or user groups) that are not co-located a feeling of >> co-located presence through multimedia communication that includes at >> least audio and video signals of high fidelity. A number of >> techniques for handling audio and video streams are used to create >> this experience. When these techniques are not similar, >> interoperability between different systems is difficult at best, and >> often not possible. Conveying information about the relationships >> between multiple streams of media would enable senders and receivers >> to make choices to allow telepresence systems to interwork. This >> memo describes the most typical and important use cases for sending >> multiple streams in a telepresence conference. >> >> This document is a product of the ControLling mUltiple streams for >> tElepresence Working Group of the IETF. >> >> >> INFORMATIONAL: This memo provides information for the Internet community. >> It does not specify an Internet standard of any kind. Distribution of >> this memo is unlimited. >> >> This announcement is sent to the IETF-Announce and rfc-dist lists. >> To subscribe or unsubscribe, see >> http://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf-announce >> http://mailman.rfc-editor.org/mailman/listinfo/rfc-dist >> >> For searching the RFC series, see http://www.rfc-editor.org/search >> For downloading RFCs, see http://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc.html >> >> Requests for special distribution should be addressed to either the >> author of the RFC in question, or to rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org. Unless >> specifically noted otherwise on the RFC itself, all RFCs are for >> unlimited distribution. >> >> >> The RFC Editor Team >> Association Management Solutions, LLC >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> clue mailing list >> clue@ietf.org >> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/clue >> >> > _______________________________________________ > clue mailing list > clue@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/clue >
- [clue] RFC 7205 on Use Cases for Telepresence Mul… rfc-editor
- [clue] Requirements are now an RFC!! Paul Kyzivat
- Re: [clue] Requirements are now an RFC!! Mary Barnes
- Re: [clue] Requirements are now an RFC!! Paul Kyzivat