Re: [MMUSIC] Should we update the IANA registry to reflect RFC 5761?

"Roni Even" <ron.even.tlv@gmail.com> Thu, 22 August 2013 14:02 UTC

Return-Path: <ron.even.tlv@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 66F8521F8B12 for <mmusic@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 22 Aug 2013 07:02:43 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.599
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.000, BAYES_00=-2.599]
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 RrmFlnVAxZld for <mmusic@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 22 Aug 2013 07:02:42 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-we0-x22c.google.com (mail-we0-x22c.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:400c:c03::22c]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 80EAE21F866E for <mmusic@ietf.org>; Thu, 22 Aug 2013 07:02:42 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-we0-f172.google.com with SMTP id t60so1730617wes.31 for <mmusic@ietf.org>; Thu, 22 Aug 2013 07:02:40 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=from:to:references:in-reply-to:subject:date:message-id:mime-version :content-type:content-transfer-encoding:thread-index :content-language; bh=mG8I/03+G0NCW5fDlzUkjYKoqOm9Ksx8mxj55uXsXc0=; b=l7NOPNmf9I/oPCWFJ/Vtn2sVZ+Omh/YBsmqe35Su6alvQ9QHbZOgaq8rXqJeZHAy2C mbCV/6WKBvKwNDOX9N3B9UBNlIrx4jwVA0tJgFVv8dYk2x1IvWwEr5MfwDMtCxPCyeAy nm+RDw58tTTB+qFtJlTNc8tfvC3P5A3doSVbUxaojZZFYeRUrD91RXZkFndUz0s+wjXq uSIXP8vm64mJKUAUuxaSzEdHm8pbsE5+RhjOq7nes/jZtNF/O4E61t6bgLmsuYbUBZR0 8WHQxp/NXF4xo9+MVuJTFEGeMvr6s7DuB6rNgo9GfGgljlA0+QHaFbM93fu1TtRhjwHM WWVg==
X-Received: by 10.180.207.84 with SMTP id lu20mr2673934wic.50.1377180159329; Thu, 22 Aug 2013 07:02:39 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from RoniE (bzq-109-67-221-133.red.bezeqint.net. [109.67.221.133]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPSA id v9sm38382732wiw.8.1969.12.31.16.00.00 (version=TLSv1 cipher=RC4-SHA bits=128/128); Thu, 22 Aug 2013 07:02:38 -0700 (PDT)
From: Roni Even <ron.even.tlv@gmail.com>
To: "'Cullen Jennings (fluffy)'" <fluffy@cisco.com>, mmusic@ietf.org
References: <201304251725.r3PHPqeV3429515@shell01.TheWorld.com> <3879D71E758A7E4AA99A35DD8D41D3D90F6DC561@xmb-rcd-x14.cisco.com> <51798419.7070103@nostrum.com> <517A23B4.3060801@ericsson.com> <201304261820.r3QIKq913501941@shell01.TheWorld.com> <51909E36.9050407@ericsson.com> <C5E08FE080ACFD4DAE31E4BDBF944EB113508AF8@xmb-aln-x02.cisco.com>
In-Reply-To: <C5E08FE080ACFD4DAE31E4BDBF944EB113508AF8@xmb-aln-x02.cisco.com>
Date: Thu, 22 Aug 2013 17:00:16 +0300
Message-ID: <038601ce9f3f$efe855a0$cfb900e0$@gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 14.0
Thread-Index: AQHhSi4rMF59GtWVZLm6eUv/wmHmTAG3YjvyAXHa8loCRvWqfgHvq+67AYZd+3cDIYzBf5kbrEdA
Content-Language: en-us
Subject: Re: [MMUSIC] Should we update the IANA registry to reflect RFC 5761?
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: Thu, 22 Aug 2013 14:02:43 -0000

Hi,
Based on this thread and the proposal in Adam's  MMSUIC unified proposal we
will write a document that will update RFC3551 and outline the available
ranges.
We will check if we need any comment to the closed RTP Payload types (PT)
for standard audio and video encodings .
This will be done in AVTcore based on the conclusion from the MMUSIC session
in Berlin
Roni Even 
AVTcore co-chair

> -----Original Message-----
> From: mmusic-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:mmusic-bounces@ietf.org] On
> Behalf Of Cullen Jennings (fluffy)
> Sent: 21 May, 2013 5:51 PM
> To: mmusic@ietf.org WG
> Cc: payload@ietf.org
> Subject: Re: [MMUSIC] Should we update the IANA registry to reflect RFC
> 5761?
> 
> 
> On May 13, 2013, at 2:03 AM, Magnus Westerlund
> <magnus.westerlund@ericsson.com> wrote:
> 
> > I also think you should check with IANA if one can touch a closed
> > registry at all, or if we are restricted to clarifying notes for the
> > registry.
> 
> If we have consensus for the change and IESG approval, I think we can do
> whatever we want to the IANA registries. If we want a totally different
> format for the registry, we can do that - we just need a draft that
updates
> the previous RFC that defined the registries.
> 
> However, I agree with Keith the registry is for code point allocation, not
> explaining life to implementors. If we need an information RFC to
summarize
> and explain all the info to implementors, that would be easy to publish if
> someone wrote it.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> mmusic mailing list
> mmusic@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mmusic