Re: [rtcweb] Question about the status of various drafts

I'd missed that.

By definition an author draft has 0% completion because no working group has reached consensus on any of the text.

Looks like you (or other RTCWEB chairs) need to start talking to other WG chairs about initiating adoption of drafts as WG items. I don't at the moment see anything in the list that should avoid going the WG route.

Regards

Keith

________________________________
From: rtcweb-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:rtcweb-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Christer Holmberg
Sent: 26 July 2013 19:57
To: Cullen Jennings; Bernard Aboba
Cc: rtcweb_ietf.org
Subject: Re: [rtcweb] Question about the status of various drafts

Hi Cullen,

I may missed something, but it seems a little strange to me when individual drafts, that haven't even been adopted yet, are indicated as 70-80% complete...

Some drafts have also expired.

Regards,

Christer

Sent from Windows using TouchDown (www.nitrodesk.com)

-----Original Message-----
From: Cullen Jennings [fluffy@iii.ca]
To: Bernard Aboba [bernard_aboba@hotmail.com]
CC: rtcweb@ietf.org [rtcweb@ietf.org]
Subject: Re: [rtcweb] Question about the status of various drafts

Yah, I get your point. I will try and find a way to better represent this on the slides.

On Jul 5, 2013, at 3:25 PM, Bernard Aboba <bernard_aboba@hotmail.com> wrote:

> I think you need to take dependencies into account.   There are several reasons for this:
>
>    a. Until you've gone through the dependency graph for the items, the full list of documents that need to be tracked isn't known.
>    b. Estimates of completion are dependent on the progress of normative dependencies (e.g. they can't be published until the dependencies are resolved).
>
> As an example,  draft-ietf-rtcweb-overview (which is listed as 80 percent complete) has normative references to the following drafts:
>
>    [I-D.ietf-mmusic-sctp-sdp] 70
>    [I-D.ietf-rtcweb-audio] 50
>    [I-D.ietf-rtcweb-data-channel] 70
>    [I-D.ietf-rtcweb-jsep] 50
>    [I-D.ietf-rtcweb-rtp-usage] 40
>    [I-D.ietf-rtcweb-security] 80
>    [I-D.ietf-rtcweb-security-arch] 80
>    [I-D.nandakumar-rtcweb-stun-uri] 80
>    [I-D.tuexen-tsvwg-sctp-dtls-encaps] 70
>
> Since draft-ietf-rtcweb-overview is dependent on a document (rtp usage) which only has an estimate of 40 percent done) I'd say that the estimate is probably closer to 40 than 80.
>
>
> > From: fluffy@iii.ca
> > Date: Thu, 4 Jul 2013 17:47:20 -0700
> > To: rtcweb@ietf.org
> > Subject: [rtcweb] Question about the status of various drafts
> >
> >
> > As part of putting together some chair slides for Berlin, I'm trying to get a very rough idea of where things are. I'd like to get folks input on what percent done various drafts are where Done is a published RFC.
> >
> > This is nearly impossible to do at any level of accuracy but I do want to get a vague idea. I took a very rough stab below just to have a starting point to get the conversation going. I'm sure my numbers are mostly wrong but I have tried to ask a few people and sort of take the central cluster of the guess. If you think I am way out, please provide some feedback of what you think the number actually is.
> >
> > I'm happy to get feedback on specific drafts or feedback of the form they are all too low or too high. I do encourage people to realistically look at the data tracker to see how long other drafts have taken for each stage to get a baseline instead of just going with their gut feel.
> >
> > Thanks, Cullen
> >
> > PS - if you are an author and look at the number next to your draft and think it is way off, please please, say something.
> >
> >
> >
> > draft-ietf-rtcweb-overview   80
> > draft-ietf-rtcweb-use-cases-and-requirements        70
> > http://dev.w3.org/2011/webrtc/editor/getusermedia.html       70
> > draft-burnett-rtcweb-constraints-registry    80
> > http://dev.w3.org/2011/webrtc/editor/webrtc.html     50
> > draft-nandakumar-rtcweb-stun-uri     80
> > draft-petithuguenin-behave-turn-uris         80
> > draft-ietf-rtcweb-security   80
> > draft-ietf-rtcweb-security-arch      80
> > draft-muthu-behave-consent-freshness-02 50
> > draft-ietf-rtcweb-data-channel       70
> > draft-ietf-mmusic-sctp-sdp   70
> > draft-jesup-rtcweb-data-protocol 50
> > draft-ietf-tsvwg-sctp-dtls-encaps    70
> > draft-ietf-rtcweb-rtp-usage  40
> > draft-ietf-avtcore-6222bis   80
> > draft-ietf-avtcore-avp-codecs        80
> > draft-ietf-avtcore-srtp-encrypted-header-ext        80
> > draft-ietf-avtext-multiple-clock-rates       70
> > draft-lennox-rtcweb-rtp-media-type-mux 80
> > draft-ietf-avtcore-rtp-circuit-breakers      70
> > draft-ietf-avtcore-multi-media-rtp-session 70
> > draft-lennox-avtcore-rtp-multi-stream        70
> > draft-ietf-rtcweb-jsep       50
> > draft-ietf-mmusic-msid       70
> > draft-rescorla-mmusic-ice-trickle    25
> > draft-ietf-mmusic-sdp-bundle-negotiation    50
> > draft-nandakumar-mmusic-sdp-mux-attributes  25
> > draft-dhesikan-tsvwg-rtcweb-qos      10 or 90
> > draft-ietf-rtcweb-audio      50
> > draft-ietf-payload-rtp-opus  90
> > draft-ietf-payload-vp8-08    95
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > rtcweb mailing list
> > rtcweb@ietf.org
> > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rtcweb

_______________________________________________
rtcweb mailing list
rtcweb@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rtcweb