Re: [rtcweb] Time allocation for video discussion (Re: Proposed Agenda For WG Meetings)
Eric Rescorla <ekr@rtfm.com> Thu, 21 February 2013 15:44 UTC
Return-Path: <ekr@rtfm.com>
X-Original-To: rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E264121F8E97 for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 21 Feb 2013 07:44:28 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -102.837
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.837 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.139, BAYES_00=-2.599, FM_FORGED_GMAIL=0.622, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Ekn1WgKUynew for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 21 Feb 2013 07:44:28 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-qa0-f50.google.com (mail-qa0-f50.google.com [209.85.216.50]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0894321F8E9A for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Thu, 21 Feb 2013 07:44:27 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-qa0-f50.google.com with SMTP id dx4so3087906qab.9 for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Thu, 21 Feb 2013 07:44:27 -0800 (PST)
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=20120113; h=x-received:mime-version:x-originating-ip:in-reply-to:references :from:date:message-id:subject:to:cc:content-type:x-gm-message-state; bh=G+a/Vk7Mbau5MBSWkj5SC6BDAEmsjUOAANpw0rtIpjw=; b=CHf3OCRCrHZJ3Mx+sWZjM7OoPkx9O7cyHTalTECmHzxHPlwwm3LtQfqeexeBRzmWI8 WpSuL5nQynSPOk5vHb+ST01znmn/s/Dg/7RW2AKFkoC2LBa1TAp8grGh7SWcJnSiV6/u vyyP3gAermiLpC3gym6YR9LNaulQbgdHtOFYYalwVt3U2JZ28+YcE5a5FQ4+f8+8vk4A ieVcnrGKEQNumnJSV+LKeeTwiS/XUUrxJA1mLZMeCLNAdUyJNLx1k0XlcEjZAS5LNvy5 Q4b9DWNk3QvZvLHzUadLNKX3u7kzDPIrzqNF+YSrgDXJsHNrZDepdBnyE2jE6G/u1rE0 yrig==
X-Received: by 10.224.174.80 with SMTP id s16mr9643252qaz.85.1361461467545; Thu, 21 Feb 2013 07:44:27 -0800 (PST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.49.28.230 with HTTP; Thu, 21 Feb 2013 07:43:46 -0800 (PST)
X-Originating-IP: [74.95.2.173]
In-Reply-To: <51263796.8030705@alvestrand.no>
References: <CABcZeBMg0AdhFj61S1hgz9WCP2JikLabrm3dAA36hyb99_93Sg@mail.gmail.com> <51263796.8030705@alvestrand.no>
From: Eric Rescorla <ekr@rtfm.com>
Date: Thu, 21 Feb 2013 07:43:46 -0800
Message-ID: <CABcZeBPoH+QQg1dPEoCc1AgwFVYdmHduwZ7W8qCahOr+Spz8eQ@mail.gmail.com>
To: Harald Alvestrand <harald@alvestrand.no>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="20cf3036368b261cdb04d63df334"
X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQlL67ai/Svu030J8D6IG1rtfEdOr42vMM8zg7+gjzMMiamic9NpTXM6iryevPV8cyMYZ/fI
Cc: rtcweb@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [rtcweb] Time allocation for video discussion (Re: Proposed Agenda For WG Meetings)
X-BeenThere: rtcweb@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
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 Feb 2013 15:44:29 -0000
Harald, Thanks for highlighting this. When I wrote this, I just basically took the same time allocations from the Atlanta meeting and trimmed them to fit. That said, I do think there is merit in having a longer discussion for a number of reasons: 1. I expect a number of the presentations to focus on quality, and that's genuinely new information which hasn't been covered before. 2. I'm of the school that on controversial issues it's important to allow extensive discussion, so people have a sense of closure. I realize others may disagree with this theory. WRT to where it goes in the meeting, this seems like it's pretty distracting, so I'd like to have it out of the way so people can focus on the remaining complicated technical issues. If the only reason is to keep it short, presumably the chairs can manage that. Best, -Ekr On Thu, Feb 21, 2013 at 7:04 AM, Harald Alvestrand <harald@alvestrand.no>wrote: > > >> RTCWEB I: Tuesday 0900-1130 >> 0900 - 0905 Administrivia >> 0905 - 1100 Video Codec MTI discussion >> - draft-alvestrand-rtcweb-vp8-00 (30 mins) >> - draft-burman-rtcweb-h264-**proposal-00+draft-dbenham-** >> webrtcvideomti-00+draft-**marjou-rtcweb-video-codec-00 (30 mins) >> - General discussion 30 min) >> - Call the question of which mandatory to implement video codec to >> select (5 min) >> - Next steps (20 min) >> >> I think this is an issue where all the people have most of the > information required already, and new announcements that will make people > change their minds are going to have to be fairly significant - and that if > so, the amount of time required for pointing out that it's significant is > short. > > Therefore, I propose that we cut each presentation to 10 minutes, the > general discussion to 15 minutes, and spend 5 minutes on calling the > question. > > Furthermore, I suggest we put this last on the last day's agenda. > > 40 minutes is enough, given that it's essentially yielding 1.5 bits of > information. > (1 bit = decision yes/no; if yes, what the decision was) >
- [rtcweb] Proposed Agenda For WG Meetings Eric Rescorla
- Re: [rtcweb] Proposed Agenda For WG Meetings Suhas Nandakumar
- [rtcweb] Time allocation for video discussion (Re… Harald Alvestrand
- Re: [rtcweb] Time allocation for video discussion… Eric Rescorla
- Re: [rtcweb] Time allocation for video discussion… Matthew Kaufman (SKYPE)
- Re: [rtcweb] Time allocation for video discussion… Ted Hardie
- Re: [rtcweb] Time allocation for video discussion… Mandyam, Giridhar
- Re: [rtcweb] Time allocation for video discussion… Matthew Kaufman
- Re: [rtcweb] Time allocation for video discussion… Stefan Håkansson LK
- Re: [rtcweb] Time allocation for video discussion… Ted Hardie
- Re: [rtcweb] Time allocation for video discussion… Matthew Kaufman
- Re: [rtcweb] Time allocation for video discussion… Ron