Re: [MMUSIC] WG adoption of other WebRTC data channel usage drafts?; Re: New Version Notification for draft-ietf-mmusic-msrp-usage-data-channel-02.txt

Paul Kyzivat <pkyzivat@alum.mit.edu> Fri, 16 October 2015 20:09 UTC

Return-Path: <pkyzivat@alum.mit.edu>
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 19DFE1B33BC for <mmusic@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 16 Oct 2015 13:09:25 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.235
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.235 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, SPF_SOFTFAIL=0.665] autolearn=no
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 YTpSE1JX_yqb for <mmusic@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 16 Oct 2015 13:09:21 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from resqmta-ch2-05v.sys.comcast.net (resqmta-ch2-05v.sys.comcast.net [IPv6:2001:558:fe21:29:69:252:207:37]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 305EB1B33D7 for <mmusic@ietf.org>; Fri, 16 Oct 2015 13:09:18 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from resomta-ch2-16v.sys.comcast.net ([69.252.207.112]) by resqmta-ch2-05v.sys.comcast.net with comcast id Vw9H1r0042S2Q5R01w9H4V; Fri, 16 Oct 2015 20:09:17 +0000
Received: from Paul-Kyzivats-MacBook-Pro.local ([50.138.229.151]) by resomta-ch2-16v.sys.comcast.net with comcast id Vw9G1r00S3Ge9ey01w9HkH; Fri, 16 Oct 2015 20:09:17 +0000
To: Christer Holmberg <christer.holmberg@ericsson.com>, "mmusic@ietf.org" <mmusic@ietf.org>
References: <786615F3A85DF44AA2A76164A71FE1ACDF796695@FR711WXCHMBA01.zeu.alcatel-lucent.com> <56202783.3010300@cisco.com> <7594FB04B1934943A5C02806D1A2204B37B45C83@ESESSMB209.ericsson.se> <786615F3A85DF44AA2A76164A71FE1ACDF79D867@FR711WXCHMBA01.zeu.alcatel-lucent.com> <7594FB04B1934943A5C02806D1A2204B37B45FDB@ESESSMB209.ericsson.se> <56213DD9.8080308@alum.mit.edu> <7594FB04B1934943A5C02806D1A2204B37B46EA0@ESESSMB209.ericsson.se>
From: Paul Kyzivat <pkyzivat@alum.mit.edu>
Message-ID: <5621596C.3070706@alum.mit.edu>
Date: Fri, 16 Oct 2015 16:09:16 -0400
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.10; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/38.3.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <7594FB04B1934943A5C02806D1A2204B37B46EA0@ESESSMB209.ericsson.se>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1256; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=comcast.net; s=q20140121; t=1445026157; bh=YkSoNwPZ8TkeYtjOY8BD6a/9E8DDrNVWaDy2VVHjjJk=; h=Received:Received:Subject:To:From:Message-ID:Date:MIME-Version: Content-Type; b=B0ip0KWpQaLClekxvAgcsufUO91ZVXddeHMvuxXA/1LdI5N60Jh6hTHnNtZnVrYaj 3IcAXUXyy8ig2Wyn2aQCfF5xQ7ub+34lUZ2um5wzO97Cv3RU1a9/G1bxZwRL05aae6 TnfLl+jIUWo0ZyWzhwZ8y/i1lw0RCNtZR2QTt0YPuy4AVjgAkp5gnXg8+U50evDwdm hE0OvOW93NpdqBqg1HoBw9hOFlH5QNOqa4juwgAee93HGH0WPhCzg3RQe7fJgi7Mje Rn03k/to+ub4C37R7GfJDs5FdWilDnUdPMzB8FhnrrooTzmXkJWLuPSU+ESD7CF3P+ i0QNUyJBIqkFg==
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/mmusic/nyEINeH_VqVwsbPyzSOV2Z5d43Y>
Subject: Re: [MMUSIC] WG adoption of other WebRTC data channel usage drafts?; Re: New Version Notification for draft-ietf-mmusic-msrp-usage-data-channel-02.txt
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: Fri, 16 Oct 2015 20:09:25 -0000

On 10/16/15 3:10 PM, Christer Holmberg wrote:
> Hi Paul,
>
> I do agree that the data channel could be used for t.140, and I support
> the work to be done.
>
> My point was the the work doesn't necessarily have to be done in IETF,
> does it?

I suppose not, if there is another place. But IIUC T.140 over RTP is 
defined in the IETF, and the protocol work for WebRTC is done in the 
ietf, so it seems logical to me that T.140 over data channel also be 
done in ietf.

> Or, is an RFC required for data channel usages?

I don't know. Probably not.

	Thanks,
	Paul

> Regards,
>
> Christer
>
> Sent from my Windows Phone
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> From: Paul Kyzivat <mailto:pkyzivat@alum.mit.edu>
> Sent: ‎16/‎10/‎2015 21:11
> To: mmusic@ietf.org <mailto:mmusic@ietf.org>
> Subject: Re: [MMUSIC] WG adoption of other WebRTC data channel usage
> drafts?; Re: New Version Notification for
> draft-ietf-mmusic-msrp-usage-data-channel-02.txt
>
> On 10/16/15 5:50 AM, Christer Holmberg wrote:
>> Sorry - my mistake. But, my comment applies to BFCP too.
>>
>> I see no reason why IETF should work on a T.140 draft however - unless
>> there are lots of people who want to do it (which I doubt).
>
> IIUC, WebRTC doesn't support T.140 (because it is not audio or video).
> But it could support T.140 over data channel. So that is a motivation
> for doing the work.
>
>          Thanks,
>          Paul
>
>> Regards,
>>
>> Christer
>>
>> Sent from my Windows Phone
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> From: Schwarz, Albrecht (Albrecht)
>> <mailto:albrecht.schwarz@alcatel-lucent.com>
>> Sent: ‎16/‎10/‎2015 12:43
>> To: Christer Holmberg <mailto:christer.holmberg@ericsson.com>; Flemming
>> Andreasen <mailto:fandreas@cisco.com>; mmusic@ietf.org
>> <mailto:mmusic@ietf.org>
>> Subject: RE: [MMUSIC] WG adoption of other WebRTC data channel usage
>> drafts?; Re: New Version Notification for
>> draft-ietf-mmusic-msrp-usage-data-channel-02.txt
>>
>>>  Now, in THIS specific case we are talking about MSRP, so maybe it
>> makes sense to publish an RFC.
>>
>> This email thread is about T.140 and BFCP, not MSRP! The MSRP draft is
>> already adopted by the WG.
>>
>> *From:*Christer Holmberg [mailto:christer.holmberg@ericsson.com]
>> *Sent:* Freitag, 16. Oktober 2015 09:26
>> *To:* Flemming Andreasen; Schwarz, Albrecht (Albrecht); mmusic@ietf.org
>> *Subject:* RE: [MMUSIC] WG adoption of other WebRTC data channel usage
>> drafts?; Re: New Version Notification for
>> draft-ietf-mmusic-msrp-usage-data-channel-02.txt
>>
>> Hi,
>>
>> Does a new data channel usage require an RFC???
>>
>> If someone wants to specify a data channel protocol X, they should be
>> able to do so without having to gather interest in IETF.
>>
>> Now, in THIS specific case we are talking about MSRP, so maybe it makes
>> sense to publish an RFC.
>>
>> Regards,
>>
>> Christer
>>
>> Sent from my Windows Phone
>>
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>
>> *From: *Flemming Andreasen <mailto:fandreas@cisco.com>
>> *Sent: *‎16/‎10/‎2015 01:23
>> *To: *Schwarz, Albrecht (Albrecht)
>> <mailto:albrecht.schwarz@alcatel-lucent.com>; mmusic@ietf.org
>> <mailto:mmusic@ietf.org>
>> *Subject: *Re: [MMUSIC] WG adoption of other WebRTC data channel usage
>> drafts?; Re: New Version Notification for
>> draft-ietf-mmusic-msrp-usage-data-channel-02.txt
>>
>> Hi Albrecht
>>
>> In order for the WG to take on additional work and specific drafts, we
>> generally require an expressed interest and support from the WG. We
>> haven't seen a lot of that so far on these two drafts, so you may want
>> to try and garner some additional interest and demonstrate that on the
>> list and/or in the upcoming meeting (let us know if you would like
>> agenda time to discuss these).
>>
>> Thanks
>>
>> -- Flemming (as MMUSIC chair)
>>
>>
>> On 10/6/15 3:47 AM, Schwarz, Albrecht (Albrecht) wrote:
>>> Dear All,
>>>
>>> like too remind that there are three first WebRTC data channel applications,
>>> 1) MSRP based instant messaging,
>>> 2) T.140 based text conversation and
>>> 3) BFCP based floor control within a WebRTC conference service.
>>>
>>> draft-ietf-mmusic-msrp-usage-data-channel was/is the precedent for getting a common understanding about application protocol specific SDP usage (on top of the generic control of a DC).
>>> The discussion and protocol design are fairly mature in the meanwhile, hence it is time to start the work on the two other applications.
>>> We've prepared initial drafts, derived from the "MSRP draft", see:
>>>
>>> T.140 Text Conversation over Data Channels
>>> draft-schwarz-mmusic-t140-usage-data-channel-02.txt
>>>
>>> BFCP floor control signalling over Data Channels
>>> draft-schwarz-mmusic-bfcp-usage-data-channel-01.txt
>>>
>>> We'd like to request MMUSIC for adoption of these drafts.
>>>
>>> Regards,
>>> Albrecht
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Re: [MMUSIC] New Version Notification for draft-ietf-mmusic-msrp-usage-data-channel-02.txt
>>>
>>> Juergen Stoetzer-Bradler <Juergen.Stoetzer-Bradler@alcatel-lucent.com
>> <mailto:Juergen.Stoetzer-Bradler@alcatel-lucent.com>> Wed, 09 September
>> 2015 14:45 UTCShow header
>>>
>>> Hello,
>>>
>>> Version 02 of draft-ietf-mmusic-msrp-usage-data-channel addresses Christian's comments to version 01,
>>>http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/mmusic/current/msg14537.html,
>>> except for the "setup" attribute related one.
>>>
>>> We'll come back regarding the SDP setup attribute, which can be part of an MSRP over data channel
>>> related SDP media description as media level "a=setup" attribute and/or as MSRP sub-protocol specific
>>> attribute "a=dcsa:x setup".
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>> Juergen
>>>
>>> On 09.09.2015 16:33,internet-drafts@ietf.org <mailto:internet-drafts@ietf.org> wrote:
>>>> A new version of I-D, draft-ietf-mmusic-msrp-usage-data-channel-02.txt
>>>> has been successfully submitted by Juergen Stoetzer-Bradler and posted to the
>>>> IETF repository.
>>>>
>>>> Name:                draft-ietf-mmusic-msrp-usage-data-channel
>>>> Revision:    02
>>>> Title:               MSRP over Data Channels
>>>> Document date:       2015-09-09
>>>> Group:               mmusic
>>>> Pages:               15
>>>> URL:https://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-mmusic-msrp-usage-data-channel-02.txt
>>>> Status:https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-mmusic-msrp-usage-data-channel/
>>>> Htmlized:https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-mmusic-msrp-usage-data-channel-02
>>>> Diff:https://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=draft-ietf-mmusic-msrp-usage-data-channel-02
>>>>
>>>> Abstract:
>>>>      This document specifies how the Message Session Relay Protocol (MSRP)
>>>>      can be instantiated as a data channel sub-protocol, using the SDP
>>>>      offer/answer exchange-based generic data channel negotiation
>>>>      framework.  Two network configurations are documented: a WebRTC end-
>>>>      to-end configuration (connecting two MSRP over data channel
>>>>      endpoints), and a gateway configuration (connecting an MSRP over data
>>>>      channel endpoint with an MSRP over TCP endpoint).
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Please note that it may take a couple of minutes from the time of submission
>>>> until the htmlized version and diff are available at tools.ietf.org.
>>>>
>>>> The IETF Secretariat
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> mmusic mailing list
>>>mmusic@ietf.org <mailto:mmusic@ietf.org>
>>>https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mmusic
>>> .
>>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> mmusic mailing list
>> mmusic@ietf.org <mailto:mmusic@ietf.org>
>>https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mmusic
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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