Re: [rtcweb] Minutes for the Data Channel Presentations

Ted --
I have gone over the minutes from the DataChannel sessions.  It appears to me that there are some issues with the minutes.  Comments below on Randell's session.  More to follow. 
Presenter: Randell Jesep Slides:http://www.ietf.org/proceedings/86/slides/slides86rtcweb5.pdf
[BA] What specific drafts did this presentation relate to?  I think it's quite important to be specific, since comments during the session need a context.  For example, did this presentation relate to the individual submission draft-jesup-rtcweb-data-protocol, the RTCWEB WG work item draft-ietf-rtcweb-data-channel, or the MMUSIC WG work item draft-ietf-mmusic-sctp-sdp?  Since the presentation refers to SDP,  at least the MMUSIC WG work item seems relevant, no? 
Richard Ejzak asked what is our bottom line? He sees this as going backwardsfrom interim. SDP negotiation removed
[BA] Randell's proposal did not propose to remove all SDP negotiation.  It leaves negotiation of DTLS port and SCTP associations in SDP, but removes SDP negotiation of streams.   It seems important to be specific about what was being discussed (e.g. modifications to draft-ietf-mmusic-sctp-sdp), so as to be able to understand what commenters were referring to. 
Peter Thatcher commented that he thinks the presenter's proposal is great
[BA] It is hard for me to understand what Peter meant without some additional context (e.g. was the comment only about the proposal to remove stream negotiation from SDP, or potentially a comment about draft-jesup-rtcweb-data-protocol?)
Randell added that the solution DO have a protocol parameter with this still.
[BA] What "solution" is being referred to here?  The proposal in draft-jesup-rtcweb-data-protocol?   A post to the mailing list?   The participants were discussing how streams are set up, but it wasn't clear to me what was being referred to. 
Harald Alverstrand stated that he Agree with this. Glad got data channel negotiation out of the document. 
[BA] Specifically I believe Harald was referring to Randell's proposal to remove stream negotiation from draft-ietf-mmusic-sctp-sdp.  Since stream negotiation is still in the document, "got" is not correct.  
Salvatore Loreto stated that he like this proposal  should negotiate only one way and should not use SDP.
[BA] Again, I believe that this meant "should not use SDP for stream negotiation".  
Jerome Marcon added that the draft does not really contain all this material now, therefore text needs to be added. Randell agreed that there need to be added
[BA] What does "the draft" refer to here?  draft-ietf-mmusic-sctp-sdp?  That makes the most sense to me since stream negotiation was still in there. 
Chairs asked how many had read the draft, which was couple of dozen. Chairsurge people to read and report new issues to the mailing list. Request thatRandell takes the open issues in separate emails to the list.
[BA] Again what is "the draft" referring to here?  Since draft-ietf-mmusic-sctp-sdp didn't contain the material that was presented, was this what the chairs were referring to?  Or did they mean draft-ietf-rtcweb-data-channel?  I have read all the above docs, and have gone over the MeetEcho session, and still don't understand what was being referred to here, (or even why it was relevant). 
Salvatore commented that one open issue is if we are going to defineprioritization between channels. Randell responded that prioritization istricky as it interacts with congestion control
[BA] Prioritization is discussed in draft-jesup-rtcweb-data-protocol, but not in the other documents, so was Salvatore referring to that document here?  
Randell responded that he has no issue of adding this to the list of open issues.
[BA] Open issues on what document?

Date: Fri, 5 Apr 2013 13:28:45 -0700
From: ted.ietf@gmail.com
To: rtcweb@ietf.org
Subject: [rtcweb] Uploaded unified minutes for both days of IETF 86 meetings

Howdy,

We have now uploaded unified minutes with the corrections we received on the list; thanks to all who reviewed.  If you have not yet done so, there is still time to update, so please take a look.

thanks,

Ted Hardie, for the chairs.

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