Re: [rtcweb] Draft agenda for IETF 87

"Cullen Jennings (fluffy)" <> Thu, 11 July 2013 18:25 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3CAB811E813D for <>; Thu, 11 Jul 2013 11:25:11 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -110.543
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-110.543 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.056, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-8, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id CntaNSwttt0i for <>; Thu, 11 Jul 2013 11:25:06 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id C52B211E8112 for <>; Thu, 11 Jul 2013 11:24:51 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple;;; l=2064; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1373567094; x=1374776694; h=from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:references: in-reply-to:content-id:content-transfer-encoding: mime-version; bh=DGkRO23gxmenCVk/qYI0z1uLMUXzTbznv+ablXZ6N0U=; b=Fo40aDMSgG1vaiWD/jZEQgnTbJikGVc6y7XrZpHMdkvloHXx2XPTczHt ZBY26W2KnHWFEZR+OXkHf5TLpaNPN5RmOCFDU3x7cKK/M/uJLfwB/wvfD RXwzcP3Zw+OHtcAvS9G77zWMGBdvQ3KHSsfq7u9gtaZGazJIYYaLP9+in E=;
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: AgwFAJid3lGtJXG+/2dsb2JhbABagwkyTcFQgQYWdIIjAQEBAwEBAQE3NAsFCwIBCBgKFBAhBgslAgQOBQiHdQMJBgyuVg2ITQSMeII2AjEHgwlsA5Vxjg2FJoMRgig
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.89,1045,1367971200"; d="scan'208";a="230723920"
Received: from ([]) by with ESMTP; 11 Jul 2013 18:24:51 +0000
Received: from ( []) by (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id r6BIOoIm024471 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=FAIL); Thu, 11 Jul 2013 18:24:50 GMT
Received: from ([]) by ([]) with mapi id 14.02.0318.004; Thu, 11 Jul 2013 13:24:50 -0500
From: "Cullen Jennings (fluffy)" <>
To: Martin Thomson <>
Thread-Topic: [rtcweb] Draft agenda for IETF 87
Thread-Index: AQHOflbcl1Vkg5a8kUyEc2Bfr2lLkplgGlUAgAAEqAA=
Date: Thu, 11 Jul 2013 18:24:49 +0000
Message-ID: <>
References: <> <>
In-Reply-To: <>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
x-originating-ip: []
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-ID: <>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
Cc: "" <>
Subject: Re: [rtcweb] Draft agenda for IETF 87
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: Real-Time Communication in WEB-browsers working group list <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 11 Jul 2013 18:25:11 -0000


On Jul 11, 2013, at 11:08 AM, Martin Thomson <> wrote:

> I can see some implied outcomes for some of the items.  Would it help
> to list some (aspirational) goals.
> On 11 July 2013 09:51, Ted Hardie <> wrote:
>> Should SDES be part of  WebRTC security practice and, if so, how?
>> Presentations: 30 minutes
>> Discussion:  40 minutes
> Are the chairs confident that this topic can be resolved in this time?
> We managed to fritter a similar amount of time away without
> conclusion in the past.  I can see how you plan to accommodate
> overruns, but that just opens the possibility more time-wasting.  How
> do we ensure that this discussion actually concludes?

Thought on how to make that happen? Time needed ?

>> Post-Plan A/Plan B MMUSIC discussion of impact to RTCWEB documents
>> Presentation: 30 minutes
> How are you planning to prepare for this?  Do you have presenter
> candidates lined up?

This is a very draft agenda - part of the issues is we are not even at the -00 draft deadline yet so I expect that by next week we should be able to figure out more details. We have scheduled the MMUSIC meetings before the RTCWeb meetings in Berlin so at some level, some of this may change after the MMUSIC meetings happen. Anyways, expect more details after we get to read all the drafts and expect us to be a bit dynamic on this given what happens in the MMUSIC meeting. 

>> Chair Discussion:  10 minutes
> I'm curious how you intend to spend this time.

We would like to inform folks of a few things happening in other WG (TURN, NAT, BEHAVE etc) but we would also like to have a discussion about what it takes to get to "Done" for the first iteration of all this stuff. We need to get WG feedback on what work is left and what needs to be prioritized. 

> _______________________________________________
> rtcweb mailing list