IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [MMUSIC] NEED WG CONSENSUS: media-loopback is all-or-nothing

Paul Kyzivat <pkyzivat@alum.mit.edu> Tue, 20 November 2012 20:50 UTC

Return-Path: <pkyzivat@alum.mit.edu>
X-Original-To: mmusic@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: mmusic@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id F138F21F87D5 for <mmusic@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 20 Nov 2012 12:50:45 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.097
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.097 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.740, BAYES_00=-2.599, FH_RELAY_NODNS=1.451, GB_I_INVITATION=-2, HELO_MISMATCH_NET=0.611, J_CHICKENPOX_56=0.6, RDNS_NONE=0.1]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id a30ETQzOxuAf for <mmusic@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 20 Nov 2012 12:50:45 -0800 (PST)
Received: from qmta09.westchester.pa.mail.comcast.net (qmta09.westchester.pa.mail.comcast.net [IPv6:2001:558:fe14:43:76:96:62:96]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 64E1221F87B7 for <mmusic@ietf.org>; Tue, 20 Nov 2012 12:50:45 -0800 (PST)
Received: from omta03.westchester.pa.mail.comcast.net ([76.96.62.27]) by qmta09.westchester.pa.mail.comcast.net with comcast id RonJ1k0020bG4ec59wqk8n; Tue, 20 Nov 2012 20:50:44 +0000
Received: from Paul-Kyzivats-MacBook-Pro.local ([50.138.229.164]) by omta03.westchester.pa.mail.comcast.net with comcast id Rwqk1k0053ZTu2S3PwqkFR; Tue, 20 Nov 2012 20:50:44 +0000
Message-ID: <50ABED23.1000004@alum.mit.edu>
Date: Tue, 20 Nov 2012 15:50:43 -0500
From: Paul Kyzivat <pkyzivat@alum.mit.edu>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.7; rv:16.0) Gecko/20121010 Thunderbird/16.0.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Hadriel Kaplan <HKaplan@acmepacket.com>
References: <A444ACE8-4EDD-48DC-86C8-7CCBB40173CE@acmepacket.com> <50ABCF23.9020605@alum.mit.edu> <2217C1EE-793D-498C-B604-8BAF604C2C86@acmepacket.com>
In-Reply-To: <2217C1EE-793D-498C-B604-8BAF604C2C86@acmepacket.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Cc: "<mmusic@ietf.org>" <mmusic@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [MMUSIC] NEED WG CONSENSUS: media-loopback is all-or-nothing
X-BeenThere: mmusic@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
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: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/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: Tue, 20 Nov 2012 20:50:46 -0000

On 11/20/12 2:54 PM, Hadriel Kaplan wrote:
>
> Are you asking for someone to defend/explain the advantages are for limiting it, or just giving that as the rationale for your NO vote?
> (I don't mean this in a negative way - I'm literally not sure if you're asking a question or being rhetorical)

It was primarily a justification for my NO vote.
But it is also an invitation for someone who votes yes to convince me of 
why.

	Thanks,
	Paul

> -hadriel
>
>
> On Nov 20, 2012, at 1:42 PM, Paul Kyzivat <pkyzivat@alum.mit.edu> wrote:
>
>> NO
>>
>> *Why* should the draft be limited this way if it need not be?
>>
>> 	Thanks,
>> 	Paul
>>
>> On 11/20/12 1:16 PM, Hadriel Kaplan wrote:
>>> Howdy,
>>> during IESG review of the media-loopback draft, a discussion arose regarding the language around indicating media-loopback support per media description (i.e., per m-line), in sections 3.1 and 3.2.
>>>
>>> My interpretation/understanding was we were requiring ALL m-lines to indicate media-loopback; in other words it's an all-or-nothing in both the offer+answer, and either every media stream is looped back, or none are.  However the text currently doesn't make this clear, and it could be argued either way, with pro's/con's either way too; so I'd like the WG's consensus on whether it should in fact be an all-or-none approach, or not.
>>>
>>> Please respond to this email by **Tuesday, December 4th** with a "YES" if the draft should mandate ALL media be looped-back, or "NO" if it should allow a hybrid approach of some streams being looped while others are not.
>>>
>>> For reference, the draft is here:
>>> http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-mmusic-media-loopback-24
>>>
>>> -hadriel
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> mmusic mailing list
>>> mmusic@ietf.org
>>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mmusic
>>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> mmusic mailing list
>> mmusic@ietf.org
>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mmusic
>
>

v2.38.3 | Report a Bug | By Email | System Status