[MMUSIC] Simulcast: Unified plan terminology
Christer Holmberg <christer.holmberg@ericsson.com> Thu, 22 October 2015 21:11 UTC
Return-Path: <christer.holmberg@ericsson.com>
X-Original-To: mmusic@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: mmusic@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8B9011B41E4 for <mmusic@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 22 Oct 2015 14:11:17 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -4.2
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.2 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham
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 o3Dhd34EbvuD for <mmusic@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 22 Oct 2015 14:11:16 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from sesbmg22.ericsson.net (sesbmg22.ericsson.net [193.180.251.48]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 24F0B1B41E3 for <mmusic@ietf.org>; Thu, 22 Oct 2015 14:11:15 -0700 (PDT)
X-AuditID: c1b4fb30-f79626d000006adf-13-562950f22067
Received: from ESESSHC005.ericsson.se (Unknown_Domain [153.88.253.124]) by sesbmg22.ericsson.net (Symantec Mail Security) with SMTP id 12.FC.27359.2F059265; Thu, 22 Oct 2015 23:11:14 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from ESESSMB209.ericsson.se ([169.254.9.61]) by ESESSHC005.ericsson.se ([153.88.183.33]) with mapi id 14.03.0248.002; Thu, 22 Oct 2015 23:11:13 +0200
From: Christer Holmberg <christer.holmberg@ericsson.com>
To: "mmusic@ietf.org" <mmusic@ietf.org>
Thread-Topic: Simulcast: Unified plan terminology
Thread-Index: AdENDi4+tdurnmEVTiCz4srs4UNUAA==
Date: Thu, 22 Oct 2015 21:11:12 +0000
Message-ID: <7594FB04B1934943A5C02806D1A2204B37B89E77@ESESSMB209.ericsson.se>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-GB
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_7594FB04B1934943A5C02806D1A2204B37B89E77ESESSMB209erics_"
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Brightmail-Tracker: H4sIAAAAAAAAA+NgFvrILMWRmVeSWpSXmKPExsUyM+Jvje6nAM0wg717RC2mLn/M4sDosWTJ T6YAxigum5TUnMyy1CJ9uwSujAVnJ7IV3OCuuLp0IVsD4wfOLkZODgkBE4m+g3uYIGwxiQv3 1rN1MXJxCAkcZZTounWLEcJZzCgxe18jexcjBwebgIVE9z9tkAYRAXWJr3t7mEHCwgK6EpO2 l0KEjST2/H/KCGHrSVydtZUZxGYRUJXomjSXDcTmFfCVePlmCtheRqC930+tAbOZBcQlmr6s ZIW4R0BiyZ7zzBC2qMTLx/9YIWryJXofvWSHmCMocXLmE5YJjIKzkLTPQlI2C0kZRNxA4v25 +cwQtrbEsoWvoWx9iY1fzjJC2NYSk9b9Y0dWs4CRYxWjaHFqcVJuupGRXmpRZnJxcX6eXl5q ySZGYEQc3PLbYAfjy+eOhxgFOBiVeHgfcGmECbEmlhVX5h5ilOBgVhLh7X8KFOJNSaysSi3K jy8qzUktPsQozcGiJM7bzPQgVEggPbEkNTs1tSC1CCbLxMEp1cC45cX+SeZTI2dfMtO6L2s9 YUJfzre3Ias4TqZ2r31RyW4qJl7S8tb544tVEVPPzdlkbzPnv2K1G3vTPNEzodIrggW3fUk9 olnYu5zRfJ3qzXWmdR85Xm29unn3R4/pYsbHo7f1LTjAd35195ykI66nHZ6fK83In927lMUs ZoNIftO83MMPbzeuUmIpzkg01GIuKk4EAILhNy2EAgAA
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/mmusic/5QkBzowxoCjZRLlrV3R-RdZilUU>
Subject: [MMUSIC] Simulcast: Unified plan terminology
X-BeenThere: mmusic@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: Multiparty Multimedia Session Control Working Group <mmusic.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/mmusic>, <mailto:mmusic-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/mmusic/>
List-Post: <mailto:mmusic@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:mmusic-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mmusic>, <mailto:mmusic-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 22 Oct 2015 21:11:17 -0000
Hi, Section 6.3.1 talks about "Unified Plan Client". Personally I don't think we should use that terminology, but if we do then I think we should add a normative description for it - even if section 6.3.1 is only an example. Currently "Unified plan" is only explained in a requirement and in a note. Regards, Christer Sent from my Windows Phone
- [MMUSIC] Simulcast: Unified plan terminology Christer Holmberg