IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [dispatch] Virtual IETF107 - SRT draft is available

Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net> Thu, 19 March 2020 06:39 UTC

Return-Path: <mnot@mnot.net>
X-Original-To: dispatch@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: dispatch@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 918A93A2366 for <dispatch@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 18 Mar 2020 23:39:12 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.098
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.098 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=mnot.net header.b=0p5aJJAt; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=messagingengine.com header.b=MzRMKTTP
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 ZzJ53ccfegGv for <dispatch@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 18 Mar 2020 23:39:11 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from out1-smtp.messagingengine.com (out1-smtp.messagingengine.com [66.111.4.25]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id BEB3E3A2361 for <dispatch@ietf.org>; Wed, 18 Mar 2020 23:39:10 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from compute4.internal (compute4.nyi.internal [10.202.2.44]) by mailout.nyi.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id 156395C021E; Thu, 19 Mar 2020 02:39:09 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from mailfrontend2 ([10.202.2.163]) by compute4.internal (MEProxy); Thu, 19 Mar 2020 02:39:09 -0400
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=mnot.net; h= content-type:mime-version:subject:from:in-reply-to:date:cc :content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references:to; s=fm2; bh=J 3m8GA0vohg/4VkK89z/qEwJ8wmBI0ICj9/wLDYZMkw=; b=0p5aJJAtWtlt1DLOP EQBsHBY1ANsNsung3pOUwJ+7cGE02prcsdZ4+KWEo2vr837EH346jPoW6cu5FoG1 YcoeVQR/oIkWXoxgWRd/iJpNSIEIvdilX86vJFKqv3TTq6dHUhphlV3diyU+2EQw zcZQdQmoOBe9lqhaGSrpcrzjkgd/Tn1F/fYAfTyxcYFrbs4V/9mVtqWQJwF2rDh9 1oKGQBRBPkp5SB2QEAA2lNnBIStbP5/MVzb0cNj7iczwhnyauXJkGqQ5RUOkA8SF bzSByHt3eTDdTsAx0j3xePXXHAu+jtQX93WLCHyeAMlTopFiDGobssTFY+ARN2q9 ksegQ==
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= messagingengine.com; h=cc:content-transfer-encoding:content-type :date:from:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version:references :subject:to:x-me-proxy:x-me-proxy:x-me-sender:x-me-sender :x-sasl-enc; s=fm2; bh=J3m8GA0vohg/4VkK89z/qEwJ8wmBI0ICj9/wLDYZM kw=; b=MzRMKTTPdpE1bgVf2giVXmuqayCo3RTuS7iadduQqZTiis8vngegJtNDV 2Tjf8NLITzBTGHnNRtJVLbMVJUzeuMOXmyViF/vJhbkV+d+qBGxJ6YFpfTYaQ05N cjBsjxYGZhS/Ax101jbji969zewJm0RLGbmFTBGN75YOxHapu79QLIa6sWJBMs+u 6xX66YULlD5mXt+lMi165EJPOW9OYDRfUNJfW8rkbpr0dZ4Tof1qryPRTr1fEXC4 449prSxlRmzUtgMtPyzbumgTTgFghDnmBpccsbX4NfUH9LUSbonmbEyhjsdhBOxD OmIdXMrkhEmKUwUIcqllocLKk0Jxw==
X-ME-Sender: <xms:ixNzXrBujthTqCQ8LMEo2nld__uI2Np7cyRt02Zayi54xZKl-JxMJA>
X-ME-Proxy-Cause: gggruggvucftvghtrhhoucdtuddrgedugedrudefkedguddttdcutefuodetggdotefrod ftvfcurfhrohhfihhlvgemucfhrghsthforghilhdpqfgfvfdpuffrtefokffrpgfnqfgh necuuegrihhlohhuthemuceftddtnecusecvtfgvtghiphhivghnthhsucdlqddutddtmd enucfjughrpegtggfuhfgjfffgkfhfvffosehtqhhmtdhhtdejnecuhfhrohhmpeforghr khcupfhothhtihhnghhhrghmuceomhhnohhtsehmnhhothdrnhgvtheqnecuffhomhgrih hnpehkihhmshhkrdgtohhmpdhmnhhothdrnhgvthenucfkphepudduledrudejrdduheek rddvhedunecuvehluhhsthgvrhfuihiivgeptdenucfrrghrrghmpehmrghilhhfrhhomh epmhhnohhtsehmnhhothdrnhgvth
X-ME-Proxy: <xmx:ixNzXqTX1LSzZfHbzN5lfE7ekrESed2NAR2TbDlKgANJhfyCzBjR1A> <xmx:ixNzXsAp2KpPbuG_bh8TSjNWGVhmuT-nim76tbypHHH9lvcNEkMq2Q> <xmx:ixNzXhfPdAwAyRkyvW-1lDzytAahJks6cnCIj6CXCcAUNVJUTo8mOQ> <xmx:jRNzXi7IGkuxbjUILh5ZR1dF-jV_gc6H_nPJ4FmHSZpRo98e1mYz7A>
Received: from macbook-pro.mnot.net (unknown [119.17.158.251]) by mail.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA id B58EF3060F09; Thu, 19 Mar 2020 02:39:06 -0400 (EDT)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 13.0 \(3608.60.0.2.5\))
From: Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>
In-Reply-To: <SL2P216MB0474AC57E80E9544B5F2A4E2EFF40@SL2P216MB0474.KORP216.PROD.OUTLOOK.COM>
Date: Thu, 19 Mar 2020 17:39:03 +1100
Cc: Martin Thomson <mt@lowentropy.net>, "dispatch@ietf.org" <dispatch@ietf.org>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <A31CA9C5-DB5D-4C7F-BE32-E9688D9ED352@mnot.net>
References: <962522AC-8132-4EAA-9F43-609E5392E608@nbcuni.com> <0d9dd286-ebae-4291-8910-20d8ccbc7379@www.fastmail.com> <SL2P216MB0474AC57E80E9544B5F2A4E2EFF40@SL2P216MB0474.KORP216.PROD.OUTLOOK.COM>
To: "\"김준웅님(JOONWOONG.KIM)\"" <joonwoong.kim@sk.com>



X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3608.60.0.2.5)
Archived-At:
 <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dispatch/biGgTByTb4gUXZVZXYozW6p2iZU>
Subject: Re: [dispatch] Virtual IETF107 - SRT draft is available
X-BeenThere: dispatch@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: DISPATCH Working Group Mail List <dispatch.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/dispatch>,
 <mailto:dispatch-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/dispatch/>
List-Post: <mailto:dispatch@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:dispatch-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dispatch>,
 <mailto:dispatch-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 19 Mar 2020 06:39:13 -0000

On 19 Mar 2020, at 5:30 pm, 김준웅님(JOONWOONG.KIM) <joonwoong.kim@sk.com> wrote:
> 
> we would like to understand if the current SRT protocol could be standardized or documented within IETF

That's not how things typically work. When new works comes to the IETF, change control for the specification is explicitly given to this community. We then come to consensus about what gets standardised, and as a result, the output may look very little like the input.

Indeed, this is exactly what happened to QUIC, and to SPDY before it.

If you'd like the *current* SRT protocol to be documented, I'd suggest publishing it on your Github repository, or perhaps a journal. The RFC Editor also has an "independent" stream for documents, but there's a filter in place for work that conflicts with the IETF's, so that may not be workable here (you'd have to try).

If, on the other hand, you'd like to bring a proposal or a use case to a community with deep knowledge of networking and security, and have the benefit of broad review and input as well as potential buy-in from a much broader group of implementers, the IETF is a good place to do that. You just can't expect what comes out to look like what you bring to the table; it does occasionally happen, but you can't count on it.

Cheers,

--
Mark Nottingham   https://www.mnot.net/

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email