IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [MMUSIC] Feedback requested on requirements

Martin Thomson <martin.thomson@gmail.com> Tue, 23 April 2013 16:16 UTC

Return-Path: <martin.thomson@gmail.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 B99C521F96EA for <mmusic@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 23 Apr 2013 09:16:59 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.6
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.6 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, NO_RELAYS=-0.001]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id vZUGqr8VgTak for <mmusic@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 23 Apr 2013 09:16:59 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-wi0-x22c.google.com (mail-wi0-x22c.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:400c:c05::22c]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 05DA521F96E9 for <mmusic@ietf.org>; Tue, 23 Apr 2013 09:16:58 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-wi0-f172.google.com with SMTP id hm14so3127009wib.17 for <mmusic@ietf.org>; Tue, 23 Apr 2013 09:16:58 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:x-received:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id :subject:from:to:cc:content-type; bh=sb/buVMiQpsB546Ztn4lq+qPVuTFRKbzxs6vLBmS3kc=; b=f2G7q1bY4siSrPhbd1OoSQLws8gONDQ2ZF5iGgqFMvlJ2fTAJc0jCGKjAjNxi/HRZP xMqShK6b4JTgLLaRd+CYWgn0ZGHpBuW3m3jj6PqKaTno8rIN4+YmnbIt4DDj3R8BeFga e+dFAwgH4iTlc7YWfG0fLsYcAZfJWiYd6QP1Z4r9eRY7+RgaG/H23H7h9/zbrfUmT/Za pKtmSY9cgOkQtnDe2sXQtoYjD9OeSRYYlmAs+Nsdiwsrz11SCZp9zwiseAtoQlwyH4DA eIVJnbHsRAYB+A27hBJyDCqcjdmrwKHcjVrK3LCC5Rqu/G5W3J97xQYTY8CKB2pFy3xl fBUQ==
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.180.74.146 with SMTP id t18mr46977404wiv.26.1366733818158; Tue, 23 Apr 2013 09:16:58 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.194.33.102 with HTTP; Tue, 23 Apr 2013 09:16:58 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <201304231530.r3NFU9mB3237170@shell01.TheWorld.com>
References: <201304231530.r3NFU9mB3237170@shell01.TheWorld.com>
Date: Tue, 23 Apr 2013 09:16:58 -0700
Message-ID: <CABkgnnX__cZddWRm1AX1ie6-W7a=oyprAmpZ5s-2=nTOMqGkxA@mail.gmail.com>
From: Martin Thomson <martin.thomson@gmail.com>
To: "Dale R. Worley" <worley@ariadne.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Cc: "mmusic@ietf.org" <mmusic@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [MMUSIC] Feedback requested on requirements
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, 23 Apr 2013 16:16:59 -0000

C3 and C4 look good.

On 23 April 2013 08:30, Dale R. Worley <worley@ariadne.com> wrote:
>    non-DES C5  SBCs generally pass through attributes that they do not
>       understand.  SBCs generally pass through codec specifications that
>       they do not understand, even if they are configured to transcode
>       certain specific codecs.

I'm not sure how to parse this.  Is that a double-negative or just two
negatives for emphasis?

Do you intend to say that the solution should NOT rely on new
attributes because SBCs will suppress them, or that the solution is
permitted to use new attributes because SBCs are expected to pass
attributes.

Non-requirements and non-constraints are always difficult to get right.

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email