Re: [Moq] Agenda topics for side meeting on Tuesday

[Spencer Dawkins at IETF <[e-mail]>]

Hi, Justin and Suhas,

On Mon, Nov 8, 2021 at 11:02 PM Suhas Nandakumar <[e-mail]>
wrote:

>
>
> On Mon, Nov 8, 2021 at 8:35 PM Justin Uberti <
> [e-mail]> wrote:
>
>>
>> I think two things are different this time around.
>> 1) RIPT was trying to replace a lot of things - SIP, SDP, RTP (and
>> possibly more). Ultimately Jonathan was more interested in replacing the
>> call setup side of things (i.e., trunking) and I was more interested in
>> replacing the wire protocol, and I came to the understanding that we should
>> tackle these efforts separately. IOW, the wire protocol will be a real
>> challenge, but I think we can take this on if we don't let our scope go
>> much beyond that.
>> 2) QUIC was less mature then. Mark was reluctant to start looking at
>> lossy QUIC, IIRC, while QUIC itself was still a moving target. This is no
>> longer the case.
>>
>
> +1 on QUIC's state back then. As a person who attempted to prototype the
> RIPT over  QUIC, work back then, I wish there was DATAGRAM support in the
> stack (and more matured) and also a way to bring in media recovery aspects
> at the application space. We are far off from where we were back then.
>

Thank you both for this explanation (and especially for explaining
on-list!) That's very helpful (and a good reminder that people have done a
lot of work on "Media over QUIC" before the datagram specification

>
>
> So I'm still bullish here. But before we jump into things it would be good
>> to make sure we're aligned on goals, since I'm not sure we all mean the
>> same thing when we say media-over-QUIC.
>>
>
Based on what we've said on this list in the past couple of weeks, I'm sure
we *don't *all mean the same thing! But I'd like to let maybe three flowers
bloom, instead of a hundred flowers that can't grow to maturity.

Thanks to everyone, who is helping us get organized.

Best,

Spencer