Re: [GGIE] Where from here?

> </Jake>
>> However, Ali had some good counterpoints that I haven’t seen addressed,
>> namely:
>> 2. Certain folks in the ietf community are interested in media but then
>> many media related people are not even aware of the ietf or irtf. How
>> do we go about them?
> What’s your definition of success? For the purposes of what we’ve been trying to do within the IETF (get existing players to have more awareness of each other and generally raise awareness of the work that exists already), I don’t think that’s true.
> <Jake>
> Sorry I was unclear on this, but this was a quote from Ali, not me.
> I was saying I don’t fully understand Ali’s position, and on the bottom line, that I don’t agree with it right now. I’m not sure what his definition of success is in this context, but I assumed it meant something like “having a positive impact on how media operates on the internet”.
> </Jake>

Media touches on a lot of things. There is the production side, distribution side and consumption side. All those are trying to move to all-IP, hence the relevance to the IETF. There are several organizations (some regional like DVB vs. ATSC or SCTE or global like MPEG, CTA, 3GPP) working in each of these domains. If there were to be an ops group or IRTF group, what would the charter look like? We cannot boil the ocean, so we need to pick some certain problems. What would they be?

Doing an audio codec in the IETF worked, but the same is not true for video. There were attempts to bring adaptive streaming related work to the IETF (I recall three attempts), they were shot down right away. There were parity FEC related RFCs, yet external organizations (VSF and DVB) went ahead and defined their own version, creating incompatibility with the RFCs. That was PITA for many operators and vendors. Then, we did the correct one here in the IETF, but nobody cared about it anymore because their stuff was already deployed.

Don’t get me wrong, I wish there were more collaboration, and problems were well defined and handled in few rather than too many places. But, the differences in culture as well as IPR rules make it quite difficult to work together. If we can make something happen to improve the situation, I am all supportive.

> Again — not a complete follow up to your note, but I’m going to go back to listening for a bit.
> <Jake>
> Me too, I think I’ve said more than enough. I’ve expressed my opinion and I’m done except if I think I’ve been misunderstood.
> Cheers, and thanks.
> </Jake>
> _______________________________________________
> GGIE mailing list
> GGIE@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ggie