IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [rmcat] Proposal for revised RMCAT milestones

Michael Welzl <michawe@ifi.uio.no> Sun, 26 March 2017 11:24 UTC

Return-Path: <michawe@ifi.uio.no>
X-Original-To: rmcat@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: rmcat@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2F2D4129531 for <rmcat@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 26 Mar 2017 04:24:42 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -4.201
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.201 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=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 PSwBvpir3bvV for <rmcat@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 26 Mar 2017 04:24:40 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-out01.uio.no (mail-out01.uio.no [IPv6:2001:700:100:10::50]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 485C81243FE for <rmcat@ietf.org>; Sun, 26 Mar 2017 04:24:40 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-mx03.uio.no ([129.240.10.15]) by mail-out01.uio.no with esmtp (Exim 4.82_1-5b7a7c0-XX) (envelope-from <michawe@ifi.uio.no>) id 1cs6Hm-0005qa-M7 for rmcat@ietf.org; Sun, 26 Mar 2017 13:24:38 +0200
Received: from swissotel07.s.subnet.rcn.com ([216.80.61.6] helo=[172.20.3.190]) by mail-mx03.uio.no with esmtpsa (TLSv1.2:DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384:256) user michawe (Exim 4.82_1-5b7a7c0-XX) (envelope-from <michawe@ifi.uio.no>) id 1cs6Hl-000Al3-Q0; Sun, 26 Mar 2017 13:24:38 +0200
From: Michael Welzl <michawe@ifi.uio.no>
Message-Id: <0AFACAAE-DC18-4D7A-B222-F65FCE5DE093@ifi.uio.no>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="Apple-Mail=_FB2D7FCB-8C9C-49A7-9C3B-97F0E0027B7B"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 10.2 \(3259\))
Date: Sun, 26 Mar 2017 06:24:36 -0500
In-Reply-To: <ED3C49AA-510F-4BE3-B780-AA66D763627E@csperkins.org>
Cc: "rmcat WG (rmcat@ietf.org)" <rmcat@ietf.org>
To: Colin Perkins <csp@csperkins.org>
References: <ED3C49AA-510F-4BE3-B780-AA66D763627E@csperkins.org>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3259)
X-UiO-SPF-Received: Received-SPF: neutral (mail-mx03.uio.no: 216.80.61.6 is neither permitted nor denied by domain of ifi.uio.no) client-ip=216.80.61.6; envelope-from=michawe@ifi.uio.no; helo=[172.20.3.190];
X-UiO-Ratelimit-Test: rcpts/h 8 msgs/h 3 sum rcpts/h 14 sum msgs/h 5 total rcpts 53198 max rcpts/h 54 ratelimit 0
X-UiO-Spam-info: not spam, SpamAssassin (score=-5.0, required=5.0, autolearn=disabled, AWL=-0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, UIO_MAIL_IS_INTERNAL=-5, uiobl=NO, uiouri=NO)
X-UiO-Scanned: B6B16DB38DE7D4C734ACF3534F5079AFF4B65C11
X-UiO-SPAM-Test: remote_host: 216.80.61.6 spam_score: -49 maxlevel 80 minaction 2 bait 0 mail/h: 3 total 16 max/h 7 blacklist 0 greylist 0 ratelimit 0
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/rmcat/-5KrTjyLj-K9LA0dfco7O1ENmPo>
Subject: Re: [rmcat] Proposal for revised RMCAT milestones
X-BeenThere: rmcat@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
Precedence: list
List-Id: "RTP Media Congestion Avoidance Techniques \(RMCAT\) Working Group discussion list." <rmcat.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/rmcat>, <mailto:rmcat-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/rmcat/>
List-Post: <mailto:rmcat@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:rmcat-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rmcat>, <mailto:rmcat-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 26 Mar 2017 11:24:42 -0000

Hi,

The update looks reasonable to me. However, I just noticed a discrepancy between the milestones and the charter. The charter says, under Deliverables: "- Identifying and controlling groups of flows as a Proposed Standard RFC”  but there doesn’t seem to be a milestone matching this deliverable.

Cheers,
Michael


> On Mar 24, 2017, at 6:21 PM, Colin Perkins <csp@csperkins.org> wrote:
> 
> WG,
> 
> The working group’s milestones are outdated, with several of them being in the past. After reviewing the state of the work, the chairs propose to revise the group’s milestones as follows:
> 
> Submit congestion control to IESG for Proposed Standard (Oct 2016 → Nov 2018)
> Submit techniques to detect, instrument or diagnose failing to meet RT schedules to IESG as Informational (Jun 2016 → Jul 2018)
> Publish first draft of techniques to detect, instrument or diagnose failing to meet RT schedules (Feb 2016 → Mar 2018)
> Publish first draft of Standards Track congestion control algorithm (Feb 2016 → Mar 2018)
> Publish first draft of evaluation results (Feb 2016 -> Mar 2018)
> Submit requirements and evaluation criteria to IESG as Informational  (Dec 2015 → Aug 2017) – this is draft-ietf-rmcat-cc-requirements and draft-ietf-rmcat-eval-criteria
> Submit RTCP extension requirements for use with congestion control algorithms to AVTCORE (if needed) (Dec 2015 → Aug 2017) – this is the design team output
> Submit interactions between applications and RTP flows to IESG as Informational (Dec 2015 → Mar 2018)
> Submit first congestion control candidate to IESG for Experimental publication (Dec 2015 → Apr 2017) – this is SCReAM, shortly followed by NADA
> Submit identifying and controlling groups of flows to IESG for Experimental publication (Dec 2015 → Apr 2017) – this is draft-ietf-rmcat-coupled-cc and draft-ietf-rmcat-sbd
> 
> Before we do this, we’d appreciate comments from the working group on this proposal, and whether the suggested milestones seem reasonable.
> 
> Thanks,
> Colin (for the WG co-chairs)
> 
> 
> 
> -- 
> Colin Perkins
> https://csperkins.org/ <https://csperkins.org/>
> 
> 
> 
>

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email