IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [MMUSIC] I-D Action: draft-ietf-mmusic-media-path-middleboxes-06.txt

Hadriel Kaplan <HKaplan@acmepacket.com> Tue, 05 February 2013 16:41 UTC

Return-Path: <btv1==748279b0a2f==HKaplan@acmepacket.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 2D68521F894C for <mmusic@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 5 Feb 2013 08:41:41 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.325
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.325 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.274, BAYES_00=-2.599]
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 WBbGV8GakS3s for <mmusic@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 5 Feb 2013 08:41:40 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mx2.acmepacket.com (mx2.acmepacket.com [216.41.24.99]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 91AEA21F8938 for <mmusic@ietf.org>; Tue, 5 Feb 2013 08:41:40 -0800 (PST)
X-ASG-Debug-ID: 1360082498-03fc21725f422510001-mNOVBD
Received: from Mail1.acmepacket.com (mail1.acmepacket.com [10.0.0.21]) by mx2.acmepacket.com with ESMTP id owkddaMpKKPYNYag (version=TLSv1 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NO); Tue, 05 Feb 2013 11:41:38 -0500 (EST)
X-Barracuda-Envelope-From: HKaplan@acmepacket.com
Received: from MAIL2.acmepacket.com ([169.254.2.67]) by Mail1.acmepacket.com ([169.254.1.214]) with mapi id 14.02.0283.003; Tue, 5 Feb 2013 11:41:37 -0500
From: Hadriel Kaplan <HKaplan@acmepacket.com>
To: Flemming Andreasen <fandreas@cisco.com>
Thread-Topic: [MMUSIC] I-D Action: draft-ietf-mmusic-media-path-middleboxes-06.txt
X-ASG-Orig-Subj: Re: [MMUSIC] I-D Action: draft-ietf-mmusic-media-path-middleboxes-06.txt
Thread-Index: AQHOA7+qo1u8CdrcbEusawlM8U7ClQ==
Date: Tue, 05 Feb 2013 16:41:37 +0000
Message-ID: <3A88DFA6-527B-43CF-B366-BD0A64DC4362@acmepacket.com>
References: <20130110224503.20977.89170.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> <157CAB7C-8AF8-4F98-9165-10A000DC9EA5@cisco.com> <021201cdef86$96f50ab0$c4df2010$@cisco.com> <A6368A20-007B-4A25-B39F-8FA1E685A7CA@acmepacket.com> <5106B189.5090909@cisco.com>
In-Reply-To: <5106B189.5090909@cisco.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-originating-ip: [10.0.0.30]
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="Windows-1252"
Content-ID: <461F18CE0FA8654FB801FD5B42724BE9@acmepacket.com>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Barracuda-Connect: mail1.acmepacket.com[10.0.0.21]
X-Barracuda-Start-Time: 1360082498
X-Barracuda-Encrypted: AES128-SHA
X-Barracuda-URL: http://216.41.24.99:8000/cgi-mod/mark.cgi
X-Virus-Scanned: by bsmtpd at acmepacket.com
X-Barracuda-Spam-Score: 0.00
X-Barracuda-Spam-Status: No, SCORE=0.00 using per-user scores of TAG_LEVEL=1000.0 QUARANTINE_LEVEL=1000.0 KILL_LEVEL=9.0 tests=
X-Barracuda-Spam-Report: Code version 3.2, rules version 3.2.2.121894 Rule breakdown below pts rule name description ---- ---------------------- --------------------------------------------------
Cc: mmusic <mmusic@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [MMUSIC] I-D Action: draft-ietf-mmusic-media-path-middleboxes-06.txt
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, 05 Feb 2013 16:42:00 -0000

On Jan 28, 2013, at 12:12 PM, Flemming Andreasen <fandreas@cisco.com> wrote:

> Thanks for taking a look and providing your comments Hadriel. As per previous discussions, we wanted to first agree on the scope of the document and whether there was still value in pursuing such a document. As per Gonzalo's e-mail starting this thread, do you have any comments/concerns on that part (if so, please let the authors know what those are) ?


Sorry didn't respond to the above yet… I assumed that the WG already decided to continue moving towards publishing it.

Back in March last year I asked what the point/purpose of the draft was, here:
http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/mmusic/current/msg09278.html

As chair you called for a WG Poll, here:
http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/mmusic/current/msg09368.html

And provided your rationale for publishing it here:
http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/mmusic/current/msg09369.html

The response to that was positive (5 people agreeing, none against).

So I was just moving on to discussing what's in the draft, vs. why bother publishing it.

-hadriel

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email