[RAI] RAI processes for handling work effectively

Gonzalo Camarillo <Gonzalo.Camarillo@ericsson.com> Wed, 19 June 2013 07:03 UTC

Return-Path: <prvs=18829a7440=gonzalo.camarillo@ericsson.com>
X-Original-To: rai@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: rai@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DB23421F9F62 for <rai@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 19 Jun 2013 00:03:39 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -106.004
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-106.004 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.245, BAYES_00=-2.599, HELO_EQ_SE=0.35, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id gC+LOsE9WmXI for <rai@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 19 Jun 2013 00:03:25 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mailgw1.ericsson.se (mailgw1.ericsson.se []) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A5F9421F9F60 for <rai@ietf.org>; Wed, 19 Jun 2013 00:03:24 -0700 (PDT)
X-AuditID: c1b4fb2d-b7f5d6d000003d54-7a-51c157bb046c
Received: from esessmw0197.eemea.ericsson.se (Unknown_Domain []) by mailgw1.ericsson.se (Symantec Mail Security) with SMTP id 0A.F0.15700.BB751C15; Wed, 19 Jun 2013 09:03:23 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from [] ( by esessmw0197.eemea.ericsson.se ( with Microsoft SMTP Server id; Wed, 19 Jun 2013 09:03:23 +0200
Message-ID: <51C157BA.70509@ericsson.com>
Date: Wed, 19 Jun 2013 10:03:22 +0300
From: Gonzalo Camarillo <Gonzalo.Camarillo@ericsson.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:17.0) Gecko/20130509 Thunderbird/17.0.6
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: rai@ietf.org
X-Enigmail-Version: 1.5.1
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Brightmail-Tracker: H4sIAAAAAAAAA+NgFnrJJMWRmVeSWpSXmKPExsUyM+Jvre7u8IOBBptOm1l83vKM1YHRY8mS n0wBjFHcNkmJJWXBmel5+nYJ3Bm3121hKvjAV9E5+zVzA2MrTxcjJ4eEgInE3ROrGSFsMYkL 99azdTFycQgJnGKUmHXoKAuEs4ZRYuvju6wgVbwCmhKzzk0H62ARUJXomf+FCcRmE7CQ2HLr PguILSoQJTFn3QM2iHpBiZMzn4DFRQQEJBY8W8EMYgsDbZ6ybgETxGZJiS0v2tlBbGYBPYkp V1sYIWx5ie1v54DVCwloSyx/1sIygZF/FpKxs5C0zELSsoCReRUje25iZk56ueEmRmBIHdzy W3cH46lzIocYpTlYlMR5P5zaFSgkkJ5YkpqdmlqQWhRfVJqTWnyIkYmDE0RwSQEDacbWH7k8 KXWeRosONeiLMjhWc/bpnHOzY/t9ucLW60CdxqV37gcW+gVrr333bOlvpmmbmArXr2LdNVmW S/dZS7TAVP/Gi6tuVK1WLn7nbKiyX2ct94Mj3w8/619zpmXStolTv/owayy9fGsFYwHjvTmK 5UcNfdQW3Tl0UOpygl9XymGHeVe6lFiKMxINtZiLihMBN8gERPwBAAA=
Subject: [RAI] RAI processes for handling work effectively
X-BeenThere: rai@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: "Real-time Applications and Infrastructure \(RAI\)" <rai.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/rai>, <mailto:rai-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/rai>
List-Post: <mailto:rai@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:rai-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rai>, <mailto:rai-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 19 Jun 2013 07:03:40 -0000


as you know, in the RAI area we have always considered having effective
processes to help us produce relevant and timely specifications a very
important issue. When our environment has changed, we have sometimes
modified or fine tuned our processes in order to continue being
effective. A few examples (among many others) of such changes were the
introduction of mentors, the old SIPPING process, P headers, and the
current DISPATCH process.

It is time for us to look at the current state of affairs and discuss
whether or not we need to do certain things in a different way.

In particular, we currently have a few groups (e.g., RTCWeb and CLUE)
that work on higher-level constructions, which use elements developed in
other working groups. For example, CLUE could potentially specify a
mechanism that used mechanisms developed in MMUSIC or AVTEXT such as the
offer/answer model and a number of RTP extensions.

Note that what we called "higher-level constructions" above are referred
to by different names by different people: architectures, applications,
frameworks, etc. It does not really matter how we call them because this
discussion is not about terminology and it is fairly clear what this
type of work is about.

The way this type of work is currently done in RAI requires the
high-level WGs and the WGs developing the individual pieces to
communicate often. Those communications are not always easy, since
different WGs sometimes have different views on priorities,
requirements, use cases, etc.

What we would like to get your feedback on is: do we need a better way
to handle this type of work in RAI or our current process is as good as
it gets?

Note that we are interested in getting constructive feedback and ideas
on how to improve things. Please, focus your feedback on those aspects.


(on behalf of both RAI ADs)