IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [codec] #5: Mention DTMF in requirements

Brian West <brian@freeswitch.org> Fri, 02 April 2010 14:08 UTC

Return-Path: <brian@freeswitch.org>
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 252C63A67FC for <codec@core3.amsl.com>; Fri, 2 Apr 2010 07:08:09 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: 1.085
X-Spam-Level: *
X-Spam-Status: No, score=1.085 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.047, BAYES_50=0.001, DNS_FROM_OPENWHOIS=1.13, 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 I+TQTzvBuLKO for <codec@core3.amsl.com>; Fri, 2 Apr 2010 07:08:08 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-pv0-f172.google.com (mail-pv0-f172.google.com [74.125.83.172]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 69B7F3A62C1 for <codec@ietf.org>; Fri, 2 Apr 2010 07:08:08 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by pvd12 with SMTP id 12so549877pvd.31 for <codec@ietf.org>; Fri, 02 Apr 2010 07:08:38 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.142.210.15 with SMTP id i15mr763522wfg.256.1270217317870; Fri, 02 Apr 2010 07:08:37 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [192.168.1.221] (adsl-99-58-246-250.dsl.tul2ok.sbcglobal.net [99.58.246.250]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id 22sm8213012iwn.4.2010.04.02.07.08.36 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=RC4-MD5); Fri, 02 Apr 2010 07:08:37 -0700 (PDT)
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1078)
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="Apple-Mail-10--147659670"
From: Brian West <brian@freeswitch.org>
In-Reply-To: <617DF0128820F9458AC39149A627EE6C01A2A2115B@MBX.dialogic.com>
Date: Fri, 02 Apr 2010 09:08:36 -0500
Message-Id: <E9CACD82-31D4-442B-8010-12C1F999E5E9@freeswitch.org>
References: <05542EC42316164383B5180707A489EE1D0AA5F54E@EMBX02-HQ.jnpr.net> <4BAF776D.20904@acm.org> <6e9223711003281100q7e1f7ac0pd548a2ab40e95ba4@mail.gmail.com> <4BAF9E7B.1070708@acm.org> <4BB58E31.2050809@coppice.org> <617DF0128820F9458AC39149A627EE6C01A2A21146@MBX.dialogic.com> <m2o6e9223711004020653jb5d773eejdea1ec98367c7ff0@mail.gmail.com> <617DF0128820F9458AC39149A627EE6C01A2A2115B@MBX.dialogic.com>
To: James Rafferty <James.Rafferty@dialogic.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1078)
Cc: "codec@ietf.org" <codec@ietf.org>, stephen botzko <stephen.botzko@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [codec] #5: Mention DTMF in requirements
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, 02 Apr 2010 14:08:09 -0000

There is that word again... SHOULD.  strike that from the draft along with MAY.

/b

On Apr 2, 2010, at 8:59 AM, James Rafferty wrote:

> Stephen,
>  
> I’d suggest SHOULD.  Using RFC 2833 / RFC 4733 is preferred to ensure passage, but if the DTMF can be passed in native form and still be detectable, that would be a big plus. 
>  
> James

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email