Re: [MMUSIC] WGLC for draft-ietf-mmusic-data-channel-sdpneg
Juergen Stoetzer-Bradler <juergen.stoetzer-bradler@nokia.com> Tue, 16 February 2016 13:02 UTC
Return-Path: <juergen.stoetzer-bradler@nokia.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 2748D1B3419 for <mmusic@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 16 Feb 2016 05:02:53 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -5.701
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.701 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, J_CHICKENPOX_14=0.6, J_CHICKENPOX_15=0.6, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, 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 pWzCoLvcgaJx for <mmusic@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 16 Feb 2016 05:02:49 -0800 (PST)
Received: from smtp-fr.alcatel-lucent.com (fr-hpida-esg-02.alcatel-lucent.com [135.245.210.21]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 8E5A31B3517 for <mmusic@ietf.org>; Tue, 16 Feb 2016 05:02:47 -0800 (PST)
Received: from fr712umx4.dmz.alcatel-lucent.com (unknown [135.245.210.45]) by Websense Email Security Gateway with ESMTPS id A7D73B197303F for <mmusic@ietf.org>; Tue, 16 Feb 2016 13:02:43 +0000 (GMT)
Received: from fr712usmtp2.zeu.alcatel-lucent.com (fr712usmtp2.zeu.alcatel-lucent.com [135.239.2.42]) by fr712umx4.dmz.alcatel-lucent.com (GMO-o) with ESMTP id u1GD2jN3010148 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK) for <mmusic@ietf.org>; Tue, 16 Feb 2016 13:02:45 GMT
Received: from FR711WXCHHUB01.zeu.alcatel-lucent.com (fr711wxchhub01.zeu.alcatel-lucent.com [135.239.2.111]) by fr712usmtp2.zeu.alcatel-lucent.com (GMO) with ESMTP id u1GD2HA0027197 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=FAIL) for <mmusic@ietf.org>; Tue, 16 Feb 2016 14:02:44 +0100
Received: from [149.204.68.190] (135.239.27.41) by FR711WXCHHUB01.zeu.alcatel-lucent.com (135.239.2.111) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.3.195.1; Tue, 16 Feb 2016 14:02:28 +0100
To: mmusic@ietf.org
References: <BBE9739C2C302046BD34B42713A1E2A22E88D533@ESESSMB105.ericsson.se> <565CEA14.2040607@alum.mit.edu> <565CEF7B.7010305@nteczone.com> <949EF20990823C4C85C18D59AA11AD8BADE16A00@FR712WXCHMBA11.zeu.alcatel-lucent.com> <56682B96.9020008@alcatel-lucent.com> <56684C13.9030106@alum.mit.edu> <5668F9C1.4040606@nteczone.com> <566903E3.8020108@alum.mit.edu> <566A16D2.1070108@nteczone.com> <949EF20990823C4C85C18D59AA11AD8BADE22AB4@FR712WXCHMBA11.zeu.alcatel-lucent.com> <566AEB05.3040501@alum.mit.edu> <56AACC37.8090900@cisco.com> <56AB8596.9090304@alum.mit.edu> <56B12F48.409@cisco.com> <56B25159.70002@alum.mit.edu> <56B28240.7080206@cisco.com> <56B2DA8D.2000909@alum.mit.edu> <56B41A47.10901@nteczone.com> <56B63EF8.8080100@alum.mit.edu> <56B8BDA4.7060305@cisco.com> <56B8CBB5.7070507@alum.mit.edu> <56BCF47E.2000603@cisco.com> <56BDB7BC.1060104@alcatel-lucent.com> <56BDF1C6.9080707@cisco.com> <56C05B63.4030007@alcatel-lucent.com> <56C2622F.1020807@nteczone.com>
From: Juergen Stoetzer-Bradler <juergen.stoetzer-bradler@nokia.com>
Message-ID: <56C31DE3.3020009@alcatel-lucent.com>
Date: Tue, 16 Feb 2016 14:02:27 +0100
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/38.5.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <56C2622F.1020807@nteczone.com>
Content-Type: multipart/signed; protocol="application/pkcs7-signature"; micalg="sha-256"; boundary="------------ms080404070303020405020406"
X-Originating-IP: [135.239.27.41]
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/mmusic/Kjg7TeQCUIulm9YIG95gMXXXA4Q>
Subject: Re: [MMUSIC] WGLC for draft-ietf-mmusic-data-channel-sdpneg
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: Tue, 16 Feb 2016 13:02:53 -0000
Hello Christian, Thank you for your feedback. Ok, I think then it might be helpful to add a related sentence or two to the IANA registration section of the sdpneg draft. Thanks, Juergen On 16.02.2016 00:41, EXT Christian Groves wrote: > Hello Juergen, > > Your proposal seems reasonable to me. > > With regards to the IANA registry for websockets I think it should be possible to add two > references to the row for MSRP. It's only editing a table. > > Regards, Christian > > On 14/02/2016 9:48 PM, Juergen Stoetzer-Bradler wrote: >> Flemming, >> >> Regarding >>> It would probably simplify the overall SDP negotiation part, but I don't know if it would >>> constrain the way data channels were envisioned to be used. >> >> On Friday Paul mentioned in his email two potential use cases, where no subprotocol identifiers >> might be added to a data channel's dcmap attribute. In my last email I hadn't thought of such >> cases. If we don't want to exclude such cases, then requiring the subprotocol ids always to be >> present might indeed be too restrictive. >> >> Regarding >>> Ok. Going back to discussion between Paul and I, do you believe that in for an attribute to be >>> encapsulated in dcsa, the attribute MUST have been explicitly define to support this (Paul's >>> suggestion below) or do you believe that this is overly constraining, and if so, how shoud we >>> relax it ? >> >> I now think that the sdpneg draft might recommend SDP offerers and answerers to always add a >> subprotocol identifier to a data channel's dcmap attribute if dcsa embedded attributes are also >> negotiated for the data channel's subprotocol. I also think we could explicitly add text to >> sdpneg saying that subprotocol identifiers should be added to the IANA Websocket (and in future >> combined data channel) registry. And that this registration should be done via a document, which >> then explicitly describes the usages and semantics of dcsa embedded subprotocol attributes, _if_ >> those usages or semantics deviate from cases, where these attributes are not dcsa encapsulated. I >> think that in those cases, where the usage and meaning of an attribute (always related to the >> data channel's subprotocol) does not deviate from the non-dcsa encapsulated use cases, such an >> attribute may not explicitly need to be described for data channel usage. But I think it might be >> helpful to explicitly say so in the sdpneg draft. > >> >> Somebody inspecting an SDP offer or answer, which was generated by an implementation following >> these two recommendations (and which hence contains an IANA registered subprotocol id if it >> contains any dcsa embedded attributes), could then refer to that IANA table, would then find the >> reference to the document, which defines this subprotocol id for data channel usage, and there >> could check if any of the dcsa embedded attributes has a data channel specific semantic. If yes, >> that specific semantic would be described in that document. If such a specific semantic were not >> described in that document, then the default usage and semantic of the attribute would apply also >> to that data channel transport case. >> >> But in that context I'd have an IANA table related question. >> A certain subprotocol might be defined for Websocket usage as well as for data channel usage. >> MSRP is already such a case, where draft-ietf-mmusic-msrp-usage-data-channel defines how to use >> MSRP over data channels, and where draft-pd-dispatch-msrp-websocket defines how to use MSRP over >> Websockets. >> Would the IANA WebSocket Subprotocol Name Registry on >> http://www.iana.org/assignments/websocket/websocket.xml then contain two MSRP related rows? Or >> just one row containing references to both the Websocket and data channel documents? >> Should we add related text to the IANA registration section of the sdpneg draft? >> >> Thanks, >> Juergen >> >> >> On 12.02.2016 15:52, EXT Flemming Andreasen wrote: >>> >>> >>> On 2/12/16 5:45 AM, Juergen Stoetzer-Bradler wrote: >>>> Flemming, Paul, >>>> >>>> The current a=dcmap related text in draft-ietf-mmusic-data-channel-sdpneg doesn't require that >>>> the 'subprotocol' parameter must always be present - rather it is specified as an optional >>>> parameter. Thus, current sdpneg text would allow to create an SDP offer for a data channel, >>>> which contains one a=dcmap attribute and potentially multiple a=dcsa attributes without the >>>> subprotocol actually being given. Based on this discussion I am wondering if the subprotocol >>>> parameter should actually be mandatory. >>>> >>> It would probably simplify the overall SDP negotiation part, but I don't know if it would >>> constrain the way data channels were envisioned to be used. >>> >>> >>>> In the specific case of MSRP, the msrp-usage-data-channel draft says in 5.1.1.1 that the dcmap >>>> attribute includes the label and subprotocol parameters. The current text could possible be >>>> made more explicit by saying that the 'subprotocol="MSRP"' parameter must always be present. >>>> Have just submitted version 04 of the msrp-usage-data-channel draft, which proposes to add >>>> subprotocol identifier "MSRP" to the WebSocket Subprotocol Name registry. This registry would >>>> then associate subprotocol id "MSRP" with the msrp-usage-data-channel document. >>>> There, in section 5.1.1.2 the MSRP specific usages of the a=dcsa attribute are specified. And >>>> there the MSRP specific SDP attributes, which can be dcsa embedded, are described. >>>> 'setup' is an attribute, whose semantic changes when being dcsa embedded and associated with >>>> subprotocol MSRP, as compared to the meaning of an "a=setup" media level attribute of a >>>> TCP/MSRP m-line. Hence these semantical differences are explicitly addressed in the >>>> msrp-usage-data-channel draft. >>>> >>>> Regarding sdpneg, I also think that the current text in sdpneg seems to be sufficient regarding >>>> the usage of dcsa encapsulated SDP attributes as being bound to the data channel's subprotocol. >>>> But as the semantic of a dcsa encapsulated attribute may be subprotocol specific (like >>>> 'setup'), I'd now tend to consider the subprotocol parameter in the dcmap attribute as being >>>> mandatory, as mentioned above. As already discussed, the Websocket subprotocol registry would >>>> then refer to the document, which specifies the subprotocol specific usage of dcsa encapsulated >>>> parameters. >>>> >>> Ok. Going back to discussion between Paul and I, do you believe that in for an attribute to be >>> encapsulated in dcsa, the attribute MUST have been explicitly define to support this (Paul's >>> suggestion below) or do you believe that this is overly constraining, and if so, how shoud we >>> relax it ? >>> >>> Thanks >>> >>> -- Flemming >>> >>> >>>> Thanks, >>>> Juergen >>>> >>>> >>>> On 11.02.2016 21:52, Flemming Andreasen wrote: >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> On 2/8/16 12:09 PM, Paul Kyzivat wrote: >>>>>> On 2/8/16 11:09 AM, Flemming Andreasen wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> On 2/6/16 1:44 PM, Paul Kyzivat wrote: >>>>>>>> On 2/4/16 10:43 PM, Christian Groves wrote: >>>>>>>>> Isn't this the approach we're taking today? >>>>>>>>> draft-ietf-mmusic-data-channel-sdpneg has general text and specific >>>>>>>>> drafts are used to describe protocols that use the mechanism (i.e. >>>>>>>>> draft-ietf-mmusic-msrp-usage-data-channel & >>>>>>>>> draft-ietf-clue-datachannel). >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> It remains to be seen if that will be enough. E.g., there currently >>>>>>>> aren't any iana considerations in >>>>>>>> draft-ietf-mmusic-msrp-usage-data-channel. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Suppose I encounter some sdp that uses msrp over a data channel, but >>>>>>>> that usage is unknown to me. How do I find the spec (the reference to >>>>>>>> draft-ietf-mmusic-msrp-usage-data-channel) that defines that usage? >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> I would like to think that the iana registries will allow me to trace >>>>>>>> back to the relevant specs. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> No disagreement on that part, however having taken another look at both >>>>>>> sdpneg and the msrp-usage documents, I still don't agree with your >>>>>>> original request for all (existing and new) attributes to specify how >>>>>>> they may or may not be used with the dcsa attribute defined by sdpneg. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> As Christian noted, the sub-protocol specifics are defined in individual >>>>>>> documents (like msrp-usage), which calls your the parameters that are at >>>>>>> least needed to be supported for that usage. Taking MSRP as an example, >>>>>>> why isn't that enough, and how do you see the resulting set of >>>>>>> attributes that may or may not be used with MSRP differ between use in a >>>>>>> data-channel (and hence encapsulated in dcsa) or as a regular media >>>>>>> stream ? >>>>>> >>>>>> Based on this discussion, I conclude that it should be sufficient for this draft to say that >>>>>> before an attribute can be used with dcsa, such usage must be defined somewhere. This could >>>>>> be either: >>>>>> - as part of the definition of the attribute, OR >>>>>> - as part of the definition of the protocol referenced on the m-line. >>>>>> >>>>> We are getting closer, but it's still not obvious to me that you cannot use an attribute with >>>>> dcsa if it has not been explicitly defined for the attribute in question. Clearly, there are >>>>> attributes that wouldn't make sense over data channels, just like there are attributes that >>>>> don't make sense over particular media descriptions. >>>>> >>>>> Again, I'd like to hear from more people on this, including the authors. >>>>> >>>>> Thanks >>>>> >>>>> -- Flemming >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>> Thanks, >>>>>> Paul >>>>>> >>>>>>> Also, it would be good to hear from more people on this, including the >>>>>>> document authors. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Thanks >>>>>>> >>>>>>> -- Flemming >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Thanks, >>>>>>>> Paul >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Regards, Christian >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> On 4/02/2016 3:58 PM, Paul Kyzivat wrote: >>>>>>>>>> On 2/3/16 5:42 PM, Flemming Andreasen wrote: >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> I'm not concerned about the IANA part. I agree that *if* we need to >>>>>>>>>>> expliclty specify attribute interactions for "dcsa", then it should be >>>>>>>>>>> part of the IANA registry. What I am not agreeing with at this >>>>>>>>>>> point is >>>>>>>>>>> that there is indeed a need to explicitly speficy these >>>>>>>>>>> interactions as >>>>>>>>>>> opposed to relying on a more general algorithmic approach (plus the >>>>>>>>>>> offerer being responsible for generating a valid offer if he wants to >>>>>>>>>>> establish a data channel). >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Well, an obvious one is that the protocol(s) the attribute pertains to >>>>>>>>>> need to be defined to work over data channels. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Thanks, >>>>>>>>>> Paul >>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> 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 >
- Re: [MMUSIC] WGLC for draft-ietf-mmusic-data-chan… Christian Groves
- Re: [MMUSIC] WGLC for draft-ietf-mmusic-data-chan… Paul Kyzivat
- [MMUSIC] WGLC for draft-ietf-mmusic-data-channel-… Bo Burman
- Re: [MMUSIC] WGLC for draft-ietf-mmusic-data-chan… Christian Groves
- Re: [MMUSIC] WGLC for draft-ietf-mmusic-data-chan… Juergen Stoetzer-Bradler
- Re: [MMUSIC] WGLC for draft-ietf-mmusic-data-chan… Christian Groves
- Re: [MMUSIC] WGLC for draft-ietf-mmusic-data-chan… Juergen Stoetzer-Bradler
- Re: [MMUSIC] WGLC for draft-ietf-mmusic-data-chan… Paul Kyzivat
- Re: [MMUSIC] WGLC for draft-ietf-mmusic-data-chan… Christian Groves
- Re: [MMUSIC] WGLC for draft-ietf-mmusic-data-chan… DRAGE, Keith (Keith)
- Re: [MMUSIC] WGLC for draft-ietf-mmusic-data-chan… Juergen Stoetzer-Bradler
- Re: [MMUSIC] WGLC for draft-ietf-mmusic-data-chan… Paul Kyzivat
- Re: [MMUSIC] WGLC for draft-ietf-mmusic-data-chan… Christian Groves
- Re: [MMUSIC] WGLC for draft-ietf-mmusic-data-chan… Paul Kyzivat
- Re: [MMUSIC] WGLC for draft-ietf-mmusic-data-chan… Christian Groves
- Re: [MMUSIC] WGLC for draft-ietf-mmusic-data-chan… DRAGE, Keith (Keith)
- Re: [MMUSIC] WGLC for draft-ietf-mmusic-data-chan… Paul Kyzivat
- Re: [MMUSIC] WGLC for draft-ietf-mmusic-data-chan… Flemming Andreasen
- Re: [MMUSIC] WGLC for draft-ietf-mmusic-data-chan… Paul Kyzivat
- Re: [MMUSIC] WGLC for draft-ietf-mmusic-data-chan… Flemming Andreasen
- Re: [MMUSIC] WGLC for draft-ietf-mmusic-data-chan… Paul Kyzivat
- Re: [MMUSIC] WGLC for draft-ietf-mmusic-data-chan… Flemming Andreasen
- Re: [MMUSIC] WGLC for draft-ietf-mmusic-data-chan… Paul Kyzivat
- Re: [MMUSIC] WGLC for draft-ietf-mmusic-data-chan… Christian Groves
- Re: [MMUSIC] WGLC for draft-ietf-mmusic-data-chan… Flemming Andreasen
- Re: [MMUSIC] WGLC for draft-ietf-mmusic-data-chan… Paul Kyzivat
- Re: [MMUSIC] WGLC for draft-ietf-mmusic-data-chan… Paul Kyzivat
- Re: [MMUSIC] WGLC for draft-ietf-mmusic-data-chan… Flemming Andreasen
- Re: [MMUSIC] WGLC for draft-ietf-mmusic-data-chan… Paul Kyzivat
- Re: [MMUSIC] WGLC for draft-ietf-mmusic-data-chan… Flemming Andreasen
- Re: [MMUSIC] WGLC for draft-ietf-mmusic-data-chan… Juergen Stoetzer-Bradler
- Re: [MMUSIC] WGLC for draft-ietf-mmusic-data-chan… Flemming Andreasen
- Re: [MMUSIC] WGLC for draft-ietf-mmusic-data-chan… Paul Kyzivat
- Re: [MMUSIC] WGLC for draft-ietf-mmusic-data-chan… Paul Kyzivat
- Re: [MMUSIC] WGLC for draft-ietf-mmusic-data-chan… Juergen Stoetzer-Bradler
- Re: [MMUSIC] WGLC for draft-ietf-mmusic-data-chan… Juergen Stoetzer-Bradler
- Re: [MMUSIC] WGLC for draft-ietf-mmusic-data-chan… Paul Kyzivat
- Re: [MMUSIC] WGLC for draft-ietf-mmusic-data-chan… Christian Groves
- Re: [MMUSIC] WGLC for draft-ietf-mmusic-data-chan… Juergen Stoetzer-Bradler
- Re: [MMUSIC] WGLC for draft-ietf-mmusic-data-chan… Juergen Stoetzer-Bradler
- Re: [MMUSIC] WGLC for draft-ietf-mmusic-data-chan… Juergen Stoetzer-Bradler
- Re: [MMUSIC] WGLC for draft-ietf-mmusic-data-chan… Flemming Andreasen
- Re: [MMUSIC] WGLC for draft-ietf-mmusic-data-chan… Juergen Stoetzer-Bradler
- Re: [MMUSIC] WGLC for draft-ietf-mmusic-data-chan… Paul Kyzivat
- Re: [MMUSIC] WGLC for draft-ietf-mmusic-data-chan… Flemming Andreasen
- Re: [MMUSIC] WGLC for draft-ietf-mmusic-data-chan… Juergen Stoetzer-Bradler
- Re: [MMUSIC] WGLC for draft-ietf-mmusic-data-chan… Juergen Stoetzer-Bradler
- Re: [MMUSIC] WGLC for draft-ietf-mmusic-data-chan… Paul Kyzivat
- Re: [MMUSIC] WGLC for draft-ietf-mmusic-data-chan… Christian Groves
- Re: [MMUSIC] WGLC for draft-ietf-mmusic-data-chan… Paul Kyzivat
- Re: [MMUSIC] WGLC for draft-ietf-mmusic-data-chan… Christian Groves
- Re: [MMUSIC] WGLC for draft-ietf-mmusic-data-chan… Paul Kyzivat
- Re: [MMUSIC] WGLC for draft-ietf-mmusic-data-chan… Juergen Stoetzer-Bradler
- Re: [MMUSIC] WGLC for draft-ietf-mmusic-data-chan… Paul Kyzivat
- Re: [MMUSIC] WGLC for draft-ietf-mmusic-data-chan… Christian Groves
- Re: [MMUSIC] WGLC for draft-ietf-mmusic-data-chan… Schwarz, Albrecht (Nokia - DE)
- Re: [MMUSIC] WGLC for draft-ietf-mmusic-data-chan… Paul Kyzivat
- Re: [MMUSIC] WGLC for draft-ietf-mmusic-data-chan… Flemming Andreasen
- Re: [MMUSIC] WGLC for draft-ietf-mmusic-data-chan… Juergen Stoetzer-Bradler
- Re: [MMUSIC] WGLC for draft-ietf-mmusic-data-chan… Flemming Andreasen
- Re: [MMUSIC] WGLC for draft-ietf-mmusic-data-chan… Christian Groves
- Re: [MMUSIC] WGLC for draft-ietf-mmusic-data-chan… Paul Kyzivat
- Re: [MMUSIC] WGLC for draft-ietf-mmusic-data-chan… Flemming Andreasen
- Re: [MMUSIC] WGLC for draft-ietf-mmusic-data-chan… Juergen Stoetzer-Bradler
- Re: [MMUSIC] WGLC for draft-ietf-mmusic-data-chan… Christian Groves
- Re: [MMUSIC] WGLC for draft-ietf-mmusic-data-chan… Juergen Stoetzer-Bradler
- Re: [MMUSIC] WGLC for draft-ietf-mmusic-data-chan… Paul Kyzivat
- Re: [MMUSIC] WGLC for draft-ietf-mmusic-data-chan… Christian Groves
- Re: [MMUSIC] WGLC for draft-ietf-mmusic-data-chan… Flemming Andreasen
- Re: [MMUSIC] WGLC for draft-ietf-mmusic-data-chan… Flemming Andreasen
- Re: [MMUSIC] WGLC for draft-ietf-mmusic-data-chan… Juergen Stoetzer-Bradler
- Re: [MMUSIC] WGLC for draft-ietf-mmusic-data-chan… Paul Kyzivat
- Re: [MMUSIC] WGLC for draft-ietf-mmusic-data-chan… Paul Kyzivat