[codec] Codec testing and the IETF process

Jonathan Rosenberg <jdrosen@jdrosen.net> Fri, 24 September 2010 19:16 UTC

Return-Path: <jdrosen@jdrosen.net>
X-Original-To: codec@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: codec@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4B4E33A6B59 for <codec@core3.amsl.com>; Fri, 24 Sep 2010 12:16:22 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -101.955
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-101.955 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.310, BAYES_00=-2.599, IP_NOT_FRIENDLY=0.334, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
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 1PKm6x0Pweq9 for <codec@core3.amsl.com>; Fri, 24 Sep 2010 12:16:12 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ecbiz71.inmotionhosting.com (ecbiz71.inmotionhosting.com [69.174.114.155]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 393C63A6B5F for <codec@ietf.org>; Fri, 24 Sep 2010 12:16:10 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from pool-98-109-139-97.nwrknj.fios.verizon.net ([98.109.139.97] helo=[192.168.1.9]) by ecbiz71.inmotionhosting.com with esmtpsa (TLSv1:AES256-SHA:256) (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from <jdrosen@jdrosen.net>) id 1OzDjx-0001N1-Ds for codec@ietf.org; Fri, 24 Sep 2010 15:15:25 -0400
Message-ID: <4C9CF91C.2000907@jdrosen.net>
Date: Fri, 24 Sep 2010 15:16:44 -0400
From: Jonathan Rosenberg <jdrosen@jdrosen.net>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 6.0; en-US; rv:1.9.2.9) Gecko/20100915 Thunderbird/3.1.4
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: codec@ietf.org
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-AntiAbuse: This header was added to track abuse, please include it with any abuse report
X-AntiAbuse: Primary Hostname - ecbiz71.inmotionhosting.com
X-AntiAbuse: Original Domain - ietf.org
X-AntiAbuse: Originator/Caller UID/GID - [47 12] / [47 12]
X-AntiAbuse: Sender Address Domain - jdrosen.net
Subject: [codec] Codec testing and the IETF process
X-BeenThere: codec@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: Codec WG <codec.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/codec>, <mailto:codec-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/codec>
List-Post: <mailto:codec@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:codec-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/codec>, <mailto:codec-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 24 Sep 2010 19:16:22 -0000

[as chair]

One of the questions raised by Stephan in his mail to the list:
http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/codec/current/msg01784.html

Raises a really important process question - is the issuance of the 
codec RFC gated on completion of one or more characterization tests, and 
do those test results themselves need to be included in a separate 
informational document which is issued alongside the actual codec 
specification.

 From an IETF perspective, this is certainly NOT a requirement. In 
general, the IETF does not require formal testing of interoperability or 
specification correctness prior to issuance of a proposed standard RFC. 
Indeed, such testing is normally done at draft standards stage. As such, 
IETF rules certainly allow us to request publication of the codec 
specification without a single test having been done.

As a working group, we are in a position to decide whether we do want 
more prior to asking IESG to approve the specification. Our consensus on 
this should also be documented in the guidelines spec once we achieve it.

-Jonathan R.


-- 
Jonathan D. Rosenberg, Ph.D.                   SkypeID: jdrosen
Chief Technology Strategist                    Mobile: +1 (732) 766-2496
Skype                                          SkypeIn: +1 (408) 465-0361
jdrosen@skype.net                              http://www.skype.com
jdrosen@jdrosen.net                            http://www.jdrosen.net