Re: [codec] draft test and processing plan for the IETF Codec

Paul Coverdale <coverdale@sympatico.ca> Wed, 13 April 2011 15:10 UTC

Return-Path: <coverdale@sympatico.ca>
X-Original-To: codec@ietfc.amsl.com
Delivered-To: codec@ietfc.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfc.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2408DE07A8 for <codec@ietfc.amsl.com>; Wed, 13 Apr 2011 08:10:56 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: 0.804
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.804 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_50=0.001, MSGID_FROM_MTA_HEADER=0.803]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([208.66.40.236]) by localhost (ietfc.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id PacZsw340gd3 for <codec@ietfc.amsl.com>; Wed, 13 Apr 2011 08:10:55 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from blu0-omc2-s38.blu0.hotmail.com (blu0-omc2-s38.blu0.hotmail.com [65.55.111.113]) by ietfc.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A0ADEE079A for <codec@ietf.org>; Wed, 13 Apr 2011 08:10:55 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from BLU0-SMTP98 ([65.55.111.73]) by blu0-omc2-s38.blu0.hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.4675); Wed, 13 Apr 2011 08:10:54 -0700
X-Originating-IP: [65.93.173.156]
X-Originating-Email: [coverdale@sympatico.ca]
Message-ID: <BLU0-SMTP98D9A2CF384C5860A44587D0AA0@phx.gbl>
Received: from PaulNewPC ([65.93.173.156]) by BLU0-SMTP98.blu0.hotmail.com over TLS secured channel with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.4675); Wed, 13 Apr 2011 08:10:54 -0700
From: Paul Coverdale <coverdale@sympatico.ca>
To: 'Erik Norvell' <erik.norvell@ericsson.com>
References: <F5AD4C2E5FBF304ABAE7394E9979AF7C26BC684E@LHREML503-MBX.china.huawei.com> <4DA5A748.2050401@fas.harvard.edu> <027A93CE4A670242BD91A44E37105AEF17ACA9B583@ESESSCMS0351.eemea.ericsson.se>
In-Reply-To: <027A93CE4A670242BD91A44E37105AEF17ACA9B583@ESESSCMS0351.eemea.ericsson.se>
Date: Wed, 13 Apr 2011 11:10:46 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Microsoft Office Outlook 12.0
Thread-Index: Acv54A/vm/J7c2g7RCKYlZpzEk3w1gABwdTgAAECSGA=
Content-Language: en-us
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 13 Apr 2011 15:10:54.0315 (UTC) FILETIME=[FBD9E3B0:01CBF9EC]
Cc: codec@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [codec] draft test and processing plan for the IETF Codec
X-BeenThere: codec@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: Codec WG <codec.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/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: Wed, 13 Apr 2011 15:10:56 -0000

>Hi Ben, all
>
>If the codec is not ready for testing, then I cannot see how it could be
>ready for standardization. To me the steps would be
>
>- freeze the codec when it is stable
>- test and evaluate
>- check if requirements are met
>	a) if yes standardize
>	b) if not do not standarize and rather go back and improve
>
>Informal testing should still be done during development to eliminate
>the risk of b).
>
>I also think the encumbrance of the codec is unclear at this point and I
>don't think rushing to finalize the standard would serve the purpose of
>this WG. Due to the encumbrance there may still be changes required
>which may affect the quality, and the final testing should begin after
>this has been resolved.
>
>Best,
>Erik
>


I totally agree.


...Paul