Re: [rtcweb] Barry Leiba's No Objection on draft-ietf-rtcweb-rtp-usage-24: (with COMMENT)

Magnus Westerlund <> Wed, 10 June 2015 15:58 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost ( []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id EA9851A8852; Wed, 10 Jun 2015 08:58:46 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -4.201
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.201 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id VX7Wf8f58NoK; Wed, 10 Jun 2015 08:58:45 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( []) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 6CE401B319F; Wed, 10 Jun 2015 08:58:27 -0700 (PDT)
X-AuditID: c1b4fb30-f799f6d000000faf-f4-55785ea1dc5c
Received: from (Unknown_Domain []) by (Symantec Mail Security) with SMTP id 66.ED.04015.1AE58755; Wed, 10 Jun 2015 17:58:25 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from [] ( by ( with Microsoft SMTP Server id; Wed, 10 Jun 2015 17:58:25 +0200
Message-ID: <>
Date: Wed, 10 Jun 2015 17:58:24 +0200
From: Magnus Westerlund <>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.7.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Barry Leiba <>, The IESG <>
References: <>
In-Reply-To: <>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1252"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Brightmail-Tracker: H4sIAAAAAAAAA+NgFlrOLMWRmVeSWpSXmKPExsUyM+Jvre7CuIpQg+MXDS0OLb7EajHjz0Rm i7X/2tkdmD1aVvUyeyxZ8pMpgCmKyyYlNSezLLVI3y6BK+PEvtXMBd95KuYvVm5g3MnVxcjJ ISFgIrFj92ZGCFtM4sK99WxdjFwcQgJHGSWaHixlAkkICSxnlNi9xATE5hXQluh9N5kNxGYR UJVY+OwGK4jNJmAhcfNHI1hcVCBKYurjdSwQ9YISJ2c+AbNFBJwl3lz6AzaTWUBU4tXDKcwg trBAisSnr1egdjlIHNk0H2wmp4CjxJwjS4BqOIDq7SUebC2DaJWXaN46mxmiXFuioamDdQKj 4Cwk22YhdMxC0rGAkXkVo2hxanFSbrqRkV5qUWZycXF+nl5easkmRmDIHtzy22AH48vnjocY BTgYlXh4FWeVhwqxJpYVV+YeYpTmYFES552xOS9USCA9sSQ1OzW1ILUovqg0J7X4ECMTB6dU AyPHZI3GaYXH++asz9dOu/9QPuSO8/t3V7nLTjHLvZBKDONNN2iPm5otHlN/4gTLM/6e+2Zs eRrPRb8cm9YnKsX5cUWymcu6d9dXxk/lsWiz+f0ybrYm/5EM9pbL5ZorKth1WrKDP58S/zjx BOv66jXnQmb7XpTkvcK7dXvdz4wEWz79D71i85RYijMSDbWYi4oTAcfi9AY6AgAA
Archived-At: <>
Subject: Re: [rtcweb] Barry Leiba's No Objection on draft-ietf-rtcweb-rtp-usage-24: (with COMMENT)
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
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: Wed, 10 Jun 2015 15:58:47 -0000

Hi Barry,

Barry Leiba skrev den 2015-06-10 12:47:
>     This document uses the terminology from
>     [I-D.ietf-avtext-rtp-grouping-taxonomy] and
>     [I-D.ietf-rtcweb-overview].
> I'm not making this a DISCUSS, but I think that definitions of
> terminology that are necessary for the understanding of the document need
> to be normative references.  I think that makes those two references
> normative, not informative.

I am changing the rtp-grouping-taxonomy to a normative reference. See 
discussion with Ben. This of course will result in the need for a new 
IETF last call for the downref. But, that is probably good, as also the 
WG needs time to digest the many small changes.

However, my personal view is that IETF need to be able to reference 
concept and basic definitions from informational documents without 
making it normative references. Otherwise we will have a lot of things 
in the downref registry and not be able to find when we end up in actual 
real issues with protocol mechanisms and their source and maturity. That 
is why I intended to leave draft-ietf-rtcweb-overview as an 
informational reference.


Magnus Westerlund

Services, Media and Network features, Ericsson Research EAB/TXM
Ericsson AB                 | Phone  +46 10 7148287
Färögatan 6                 | Mobile +46 73 0949079
SE-164 80 Stockholm, Sweden | mailto: