IETF Logo Mail Archive

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

Paul Kyzivat <pkyzivat@alum.mit.edu> Mon, 19 November 2012 16:57 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 0CBEF21F86BB for <mmusic@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 19 Nov 2012 08:57:52 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -0.399
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.399 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.038, BAYES_00=-2.599, FH_RELAY_NODNS=1.451, HELO_MISMATCH_NET=0.611, 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 bMzPrnhIIpRz for <mmusic@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 19 Nov 2012 08:57:51 -0800 (PST)
Received: from qmta02.westchester.pa.mail.comcast.net (qmta02.westchester.pa.mail.comcast.net [IPv6:2001:558:fe14:43:76:96:62:24]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 54FA921F86BA for <mmusic@ietf.org>; Mon, 19 Nov 2012 08:57:51 -0800 (PST)
Received: from omta21.westchester.pa.mail.comcast.net ([76.96.62.72]) by qmta02.westchester.pa.mail.comcast.net with comcast id RQXw1k0071ZXKqc51Uxqpz; Mon, 19 Nov 2012 16:57:50 +0000
Received: from Paul-Kyzivats-MacBook-Pro.local ([50.138.229.164]) by omta21.westchester.pa.mail.comcast.net with comcast id RUxq1k00B3ZTu2S3hUxq9x; Mon, 19 Nov 2012 16:57:50 +0000
Message-ID: <50AA650D.7080109@alum.mit.edu>
Date: Mon, 19 Nov 2012 11:57:49 -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: mmusic@ietf.org
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
Subject: Re: [MMUSIC] 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 16:57:52 -0000

On 11/19/12 11:50 AM, Harald Alvestrand wrote:

>>> I have at one point in my life dealt with T-series fax
>>
>> ...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?

Sadly, I gather that the legal world hasn't yet caught up with 
technology. E.g., I think that faxed copies of documents with signatures 
have more legal validity than do pdf files containing signatures. 
Stupid, but it can still drive demand for continued support of fax 
protocols.

[I'm not an expert on this - this comment is mostly based on 2nd hand data.]

	Thanks,
	Paul

v2.46.0 | Report a Bug | By Email | System Status