IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [rtcweb] Proposed Video Selection Process

David Singer <singer@apple.com> Thu, 21 November 2013 19:25 UTC

Return-Path: <singer@apple.com>
X-Original-To: rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C00601AE079 for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 21 Nov 2013 11:25:00 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -9.427
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-9.427 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, GB_I_INVITATION=-2, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.525, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id UN9AZhQ-t6fZ for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 21 Nov 2013 11:24:58 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-out.apple.com (mail-out.apple.com [17.151.62.49]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E384D1AE05D for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Thu, 21 Nov 2013 11:24:58 -0800 (PST)
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; charset="windows-1252"
Received: from relay6.apple.com ([17.128.113.90]) by mail-out.apple.com (Oracle Communications Messaging Server 7u4-23.01 (7.0.4.23.0) 64bit (built Aug 10 2011)) with ESMTP id <0MWM002O2OKZ44Z1@mail-out.apple.com> for rtcweb@ietf.org; Thu, 21 Nov 2013 11:24:52 -0800 (PST)
X-AuditID: 1180715a-b7f3c6d00000020e-19-528e5e03df0b
Received: from spicerack.apple.com (spicerack.apple.com [17.128.115.40]) (using TLS with cipher RC4-MD5 (128/128 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by relay6.apple.com (Apple SCV relay) with SMTP id 7B.06.00526.30E5E825; Thu, 21 Nov 2013 11:24:51 -0800 (PST)
Received: from singda.apple.com (singda.apple.com [17.197.32.11]) by spicerack.apple.com (Oracle Communications Messaging Server 7u4-24.01(7.0.4.24.0) 64bit (built Nov 17 2011)) with ESMTPSA id <0MWM00DO0OLFKX40@spicerack.apple.com> for rtcweb@ietf.org; Thu, 21 Nov 2013 11:24:51 -0800 (PST)
From: David Singer <singer@apple.com>
In-reply-to: <528E5057.30408@stpeter.im>
Date: Thu, 21 Nov 2013 11:24:51 -0800
Content-transfer-encoding: quoted-printable
Message-id: <F89641F6-BC91-4BF2-89CB-26F5C187A66A@apple.com>
References: <528E39F4.4010706@ericsson.com> <528E5057.30408@stpeter.im>
To: Peter Saint-Andre <stpeter@stpeter.im>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1822)
X-Brightmail-Tracker: H4sIAAAAAAAAA+NgFlrCLMWRmVeSWpSXmKPExsUi2FCsocsc1xdkcOibucXaf+3sDoweS5b8 ZApgjOKySUnNySxLLdK3S+DKeDPrA0vBXY6KnTOOsDcwtrB3MXJySAiYSCyf3MQEYYtJXLi3 nq2LkYtDSGAyk8T5Ey+gnNVMEp8W32fsYuTgYBbQk7h/UQukgRfIvNV8nxnEFhYwk/hwvwNs KJuAqsSDOccYQWxOAQ2Jpe9ms4DYLEDxp193soLYzAKxEntfrWSGsLUlnry7wAox00ai7/g/ NhBbSMBdYtfX5WAzRQS0JC5d64M6WlZi9/PvzBMYBWYhXDQLyUWzkExdwMi8ilGgKDUnsdJM L7GgICdVLzk/dxMjOOwKo3YwNiy3OsQowMGoxAO0vC9IiDWxrLgy9xCjBAezkgjvV3WgEG9K YmVValF+fFFpTmrxIUZpDhYlcd5dvkApgfTEktTs1NSC1CKYLBMHp1QDo/T/Ro0VDUahXg1q 38IaWWv9v78tc9zKOCn9+s1Niy/7rmXo3urzmn1XcPW3ic0XDlifnVa8qMh6S7jZ2295JpGq pYd3vSkye8xToultbRfuVqX2/+gGld37dvwsTNVYqbn0/4917OqfpG5zTtjIMPF55Kycf5/a uwUj85ZkRYkULLiz2eCUkRJLcUaioRZzUXEiAHh1V+U3AgAA
Cc: "rtcweb@ietf.org" <rtcweb@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [rtcweb] Proposed Video Selection Process
X-BeenThere: rtcweb@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: Real-Time Communication in WEB-browsers working group list <rtcweb.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/rtcweb>, <mailto:rtcweb-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/rtcweb/>
List-Post: <mailto:rtcweb@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:rtcweb-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rtcweb>, <mailto:rtcweb-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 21 Nov 2013 19:25:00 -0000

On Nov 21, 2013, at 10:26 , Peter Saint-Andre <stpeter@stpeter.im> wrote:

> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
> 
> On 11/21/13 9:51 AM, Magnus Westerlund wrote:
> 
>> The method we propose is based on Instant-runoff voting, 
>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Instant-runoff_voting, with the 
>> understanding that the choice will be the winner according to the 
>> Instant-runoff voting process.
> 
> I have the greatest respect for the chairs, but this is an engraved
> invitation for people to appeal whatever decision might be reached.
> 
> More fundamentally: Voting? At the IETF?? Really?!?
> 
> I sincerely hope we can figure out a better process…
> 

Me too.

For example, the W3C uses a Call for Objections process, where the option with the weakest technical objection is selected.  I fear that voting will result in a decision that won’t be honored by a significant part of the population.  We don’t need just a mandate, we want the effect of an effective mandate.


David Singer
Multimedia and Software Standards, Apple Inc.

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email