IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [codec] WG Review: Internet Wideband Audio Codec (codec)

stephen botzko <stephen.botzko@gmail.com> Wed, 13 January 2010 11:22 UTC

Return-Path: <stephen.botzko@gmail.com>
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 761DE28C11F; Wed, 13 Jan 2010 03:22:59 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.598
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.598 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001]
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 E+ExMA73FA7c; Wed, 13 Jan 2010 03:22:59 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-fx0-f213.google.com (mail-fx0-f213.google.com [209.85.220.213]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9208D3A687B; Wed, 13 Jan 2010 03:22:58 -0800 (PST)
Received: by fxm5 with SMTP id 5so1653603fxm.29 for <multiple recipients>; Wed, 13 Jan 2010 03:22:52 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:mime-version:received:in-reply-to:references :date:message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type; bh=y+G4aKWy0GJ5MW5OE1hh/C5OznfWRXUoVpQpiZs61rk=; b=P4LBfzeaMqljhP8igQb755yH2KwbR5+k03WU8Pa6TsghfWA1DkLS4rA4wycTW0ADUm +GjJYtK7p5S64h1pVdMrP8VRRf+vgVk+ayiTqYdA40jmLvJDbTrkm/GBMK1MniW+RvBk It+oJPLU+6Xh5PiTeOzRMt6AEK5Twygus9PFw=
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type; b=SzDMeMeBjV6P/cSKsJLbkgCrAh9LLLjajg/k8FgabflLep9eqlCw50CajCHfxAElZY hnG0YINm9iSjb/Gr+LWs00Zja1dS5dvVf2YlWKQbuVNnc09ZHRjsfEpaJebpW1li2V6K iE//oEYYj3WgNBI3UCsgFrn0CMfFe+hvn8ZzE=
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.102.17.28 with SMTP id 28mr1611193muq.120.1263381772684; Wed, 13 Jan 2010 03:22:52 -0800 (PST)
In-Reply-To: <alpine.DEB.1.10.1001130803220.15329@uplift.swm.pp.se>
References: <20091223171501.7BAE33A697D@core3.amsl.com> <13194D66-2110-4CB2-B130-8807BE57488B@cisco.com> <458913681001111218o3b232e4sd785b3c09809fcbc@mail.gmail.com> <4B4C46E0.8020609@iptego.com> <8903A80C339345EA82F3AEB33F708840@your029b8cecfe> <4B4CAB6D.8060109@octasic.com> <6e9223711001121222w65e1a25ak60758f29c981efd7@mail.gmail.com> <806dafc21001121239o9e1897cu27fbb3ad5776f5bb@mail.gmail.com> <6e9223711001121248v4dbd0e3dxcccf44b268bce395@mail.gmail.com> <alpine.DEB.1.10.1001130803220.15329@uplift.swm.pp.se>
Date: Wed, 13 Jan 2010 06:22:52 -0500
Message-ID: <6e9223711001130322m69b994c2n3252d572d1323f0f@mail.gmail.com>
From: stephen botzko <stephen.botzko@gmail.com>
To: Mikael Abrahamsson <swmike@swm.pp.se>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="00163646b99ac6cde3047d09fdd9"
Cc: IAB IAB <iab@iab.org>, codec@ietf.org, IETF Discussion <ietf@ietf.org>, IESG IESG <iesg@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [codec] WG Review: Internet Wideband Audio Codec (codec)
X-BeenThere: codec@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: "Should the IETF standardize wideband Internet codec\(s\)? " <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: Wed, 13 Jan 2010 11:22:59 -0000

>>>
    I see absolutely no good reason not to start the work and do
negotiations with other SDOs on the side.
>>>
That is thw way these joint bodies are usually formed (at least the
MPEG/ITU-T ones).  The group(s) form, and begin their work.(independently)
In parallel the chairs and SDO management work out the joint body
organization.  It is easiest if the discussions on joint body organization
begin as soon as possible.

Stephen Botzko
Polycom

On Wed, Jan 13, 2010 at 2:06 AM, Mikael Abrahamsson <swmike@swm.pp.se>wrote:

> On Tue, 12 Jan 2010, stephen botzko wrote:
>
>  A joint-body first agrees upon its charter and working methods, which
>> allows
>> for any negotiation on IPR rules and membership, etc.
>>
>> All of the companies I know who are active in the ITU are also active in
>> the
>> IETF.  So it seems to me that there should be some willingness to work
>> together.
>>
>> In any event, if the joint-body negotiations fail, then the IETF simply
>> proceeds on its own.  There is not much to lose, and as you seem to agree,
>> potentially a lot to gain.
>>
>
> Ok, in IETF spirit of "running code" etc, just start the IETF WG and start
> the work, and at the same time inform ITU about what's happening, and invite
> them to participate in the process.
>
> Talking about work is just talking and is not productive. Actually starting
> the work brings urgency to the table and will increase leverage to any
> negotiations that might be taking place.
>
> "Would the people saying it's impossible please get out of the way of the
> people actually doing it"
>
> I see absolutely no good reason not to start the work and do negotiations
> with other SDOs on the side.
>
> --
> Mikael Abrahamsson    email: swmike@swm.pp.se
>
> _______________________________________________
> codec mailing list
> codec@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/codec
>

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email