IETF Logo Mail Archive

[MMUSIC] T.38 (Re: M-line philosophy (Re: Wisdom sought: Prioritization of codecs))

Adam Roach <adam@nostrum.com> Mon, 19 November 2012 16:57 UTC

Return-Path: <adam@nostrum.com>
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 212C621F86A8 for <mmusic@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 19 Nov 2012 08:57:47 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -102.378
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.378 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.222, BAYES_00=-2.599, SPF_PASS=-0.001, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
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 Ne57FYc4bAF2 for <mmusic@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 19 Nov 2012 08:57:46 -0800 (PST)
Received: from shaman.nostrum.com (nostrum-pt.tunnel.tserv2.fmt.ipv6.he.net [IPv6:2001:470:1f03:267::2]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4688921F8683 for <mmusic@ietf.org>; Mon, 19 Nov 2012 08:57:46 -0800 (PST)
Received: from Orochi.local (99-152-144-32.lightspeed.dllstx.sbcglobal.net [99.152.144.32]) (authenticated bits=0) by shaman.nostrum.com (8.14.3/8.14.3) with ESMTP id qAJGvOu1053929 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-CAMELLIA256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Mon, 19 Nov 2012 10:57:27 -0600 (CST) (envelope-from adam@nostrum.com)
Message-ID: <50AA64F2.4020607@nostrum.com>
Date: Mon, 19 Nov 2012 10:57:22 -0600
From: Adam Roach <adam@nostrum.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.8; rv:16.0) Gecko/20121026 Thunderbird/16.0.2
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Harald Alvestrand <harald@alvestrand.no>
References: <50A4AC20.5030306@alvestrand.no> <50A4AE7F.4040403@alvestrand.no> <50A51F04.5090502@alum.mit.edu> <50A54895.7030006@nostrum.com> <50A9BFD4.3000601@alvestrand.no> <50AA527C.6060200@nostrum.com> <50AA588B.9090805@alvestrand.no> <50AA5D55.6080006@nostrum.com> <50AA6363.7040201@alvestrand.no>
In-Reply-To: <50AA6363.7040201@alvestrand.no>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received-SPF: pass (nostrum.com: 99.152.144.32 is authenticated by a trusted mechanism)
Cc: mmusic@ietf.org
Subject: [MMUSIC] T.38 (Re: M-line philosophy (Re: Wisdom sought: Prioritization of codecs))
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: Mon, 19 Nov 2012 16:57:47 -0000

On 11/19/12 10:50, Harald Alvestrand wrote:
>> ...T.38 fax isn't one of them. Sadly.
>
> What's your scenario where T.38 fax over RTP is relevant when file 
> transfer over a reliable channel is available between the same 2 devices?

This is a rat hole that I'm not going to dive too far into, but my 
understanding is that the tenacity of fax as an underlying technology 
has to do with a substantial body of U.S. case law that establishes that 
faxed legal documents are binding, while leaving the issue of 
transmission using a technology known by any other name unsettled.

Is this a mind-numbingly stupid reason for it to hang on? Yeah, maybe. 
Does that change the facts on the ground? No. Not even a little bit.

ObHumor: 
http://www.theonion.com/articles/report-fax-machines-still-pretty-impressive-if-you,21256/

/a

v2.41.0 | Report a Bug | By Email | System Status