Re: [rtcweb] External Review Team

Bernard Aboba <> Fri, 08 November 2013 18:19 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 992E721E81E4 for <>; Fri, 8 Nov 2013 10:19:34 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -102.326
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.326 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.272, BAYES_00=-2.599, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Bc0tEDG9JriS for <>; Fri, 8 Nov 2013 10:19:24 -0800 (PST)
Received: from ( []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 52B3E21E81F7 for <>; Fri, 8 Nov 2013 10:19:15 -0800 (PST)
Received: from BLU169-W133 ([]) by with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.4675); Fri, 8 Nov 2013 10:19:15 -0800
X-TMN: [AeQzeFaD0MQWjgRQMe1GJf0x4U4IgdHB]
X-Originating-Email: []
Message-ID: <BLU169-W133A02FF94CE62595F7D46D93F20@phx.gbl>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_e1846537-4d50-4ad7-9c2a-b43c0e57c557_"
From: Bernard Aboba <>
To: "" <>
Date: Fri, 8 Nov 2013 10:19:14 -0800
Importance: Normal
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 08 Nov 2013 18:19:15.0426 (UTC) FILETIME=[08239420:01CEDCAF]
Subject: Re: [rtcweb] External Review Team
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: Fri, 08 Nov 2013 18:19:37 -0000

Adam Roach stated:
"I'll make an even stronger statement: I would contend that any strong  push against the use of an external review team amounts to a tacit  admission by an individual that the arguments for their preferred  position are insufficiently compelling."
[BA] If the core issues under consideration were technical, I'd agree with you. 
Unfortunately, they aren't.  The core issue (as Jonathan ably stated) is the perceived legal risk.  Convening an external review team of IETF participants to evaluate those legal risks is unlikely to persuade the real audience for those recommendations - lawyers. 
If the goal is to come up with a compelling legal analysis, the expert panel should probably be composed of recognized legal experts.  Good luck with recruiting such a panel to work pro-bono.