[rtcweb] Fwd: New Version Notification for draft-ietf-rtcweb-use-cases-and-requirements-11.txt

Stefan Håkansson LK <stefan.lk.hakansson@ericsson.com> Thu, 27 June 2013 08:49 UTC

Return-Path: <stefan.lk.hakansson@ericsson.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 6D82821F9C97 for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 27 Jun 2013 01:49:50 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -5.037
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.037 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.913, BAYES_00=-2.599, HELO_EQ_SE=0.35, MIME_8BIT_HEADER=0.3, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 5P7lDnsbDbJN for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 27 Jun 2013 01:49:45 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mailgw2.ericsson.se (mailgw2.ericsson.se [193.180.251.37]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C297521F9C93 for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Thu, 27 Jun 2013 01:49:44 -0700 (PDT)
X-AuditID: c1b4fb25-b7f1e6d00000274b-c1-51cbfca77bf2
Received: from ESESSHC005.ericsson.se (Unknown_Domain [153.88.253.125]) by mailgw2.ericsson.se (Symantec Mail Security) with SMTP id 57.3A.10059.7ACFBC15; Thu, 27 Jun 2013 10:49:43 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from ESESSMB209.ericsson.se ([169.254.9.6]) by ESESSHC005.ericsson.se ([153.88.183.33]) with mapi id 14.02.0328.009; Thu, 27 Jun 2013 10:49:43 +0200
From: =?iso-8859-1?Q?Stefan_H=E5kansson_LK?= <stefan.lk.hakansson@ericsson.com>
To: "rt >> \"rtcweb@ietf.org\"" <rtcweb@ietf.org>
Thread-Topic: New Version Notification for draft-ietf-rtcweb-use-cases-and-requirements-11.txt
Thread-Index: AQHOcxH6LsByzdb3v06Hk4dVDiPxEA==
Date: Thu, 27 Jun 2013 08:49:43 +0000
Message-ID: <1447FA0C20ED5147A1AA0EF02890A64B1C306ECD@ESESSMB209.ericsson.se>
References: <20130627084022.19251.22430.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-originating-ip: [153.88.183.16]
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Brightmail-Tracker: H4sIAAAAAAAAA+NgFlrFLMWRmVeSWpSXmKPExsUyM+Jvre7yP6cDDY7fMbFY+6+d3YHRY8mS n0wBjFFcNimpOZllqUX6dglcGS/e7WYtmKJacW9lJ2sD40PZLkZODgkBE4lPE18zQthiEhfu rWfrYuTiEBI4zCjx+sVjJghnEaPE0s/9TCBVbAKBElv3LWADsUUEDCW+3WxlAbGFBRIkvrWu gIonSJza0sjaxcgBZOtJzGtlBwmzCKhK9M+aAGbzCvhKfFz3DaxVSMBRYlrfPLAjGIGO+H5q DdgqZgFxiVtP5jNBHCcgsWTPeWYIW1Ti5eN/rBC2osTOs+3MEPV6EjemTmGDsLUlli18zQyx S1Di5MwnLBMYRWYhGTsLScssJC2zkLQsYGRZxciem5iZk15utIkRGN4Ht/xW3cF455zIIUZp DhYlcd6Pp3YFCgmkJ5akZqemFqQWxReV5qQWH2Jk4uCUamCcY2cduOWZRvs+zTWeAWqmj94a ee88dfCa9a77qwos/v/bP/3iC9m3s+KmsFiFR/EcPPX6TbnNui2rdhnmuK24zL112alaXgHZ 9eYN2lPe+2Ww2j0o5Dko/EFnV2FR4Zl1M9P6H3JpiHFaX3t983NTh20/s1LahX+bSltjF01e Gq+Xav/O7dhpJZbijERDLeai4kQAVJAy7z0CAAA=
Subject: [rtcweb] Fwd: New Version Notification for draft-ietf-rtcweb-use-cases-and-requirements-11.txt
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, 27 Jun 2013 08:49:50 -0000

 From the change log:

    o  Described that the API requirements are really from a W3C
       perspective and are supplied as an appendix in the introduction.
       Moved API requirements to an Appendix.

    o  Removed the "Conventions" section with the key-words and reference
       to RFC2119.  Also changed uppercase MUST's/SHOULD's to lowercase.

    o  Added a note on the proposed use of the document to the
       introduction.

    o  Removed the note talking about WS from the "FW that only allows
       http" use-case.

    o  Removed the word "Skype" that was used as example in one of the
       use-cases.

    o  Clarified F3 (the req saying the everything the browser sends must
       be rate controlled).

    o  Removed the TBD saying we need to define reasonable levels from
       the requirement saying that quality must be good even in presence
       of packet losses (F5), and changed "must" to "should" (Based on a
       list discussion involving Bernard).

    o  Removed F6 ("The browser must be able to handle high loss and
       jitter levels in a graceful way."), also after a list discussion.

    o  Clarified F7 (used to say that the browser must support fast
       stream switches, now says that reference frames must be inserted
       when requested).
    o  Removed the questions from F9 (echo cancellation), F10
       (syncronization), F21 (telephony codec).

    o  Exchanged "restrictive firewalls" for "limited middleboxes" in F19
       (as proposed by Martin).

    o  Expanded DTMF and IVR in F22 (proposed by Martin)

    o  Added ref to RFC5405 in F23 (proposed by Lars Eggert).

    o  Exchanged "service provided" for "web application" in F32.

    o  Changed the text in 3.2.1 that motivates F36 (new text "It is
       essential that media and data be encrypted, authenticated ...
       bound to the user identity."); and rewrote F36, included a ref to
       RFC5479.

    o  Changed "quality of service" to "quality of experience" in F38.

    o  Added F39.

    o  Used new formulation of A17 (proposed by Martin).

    o  Updated A20.

    o  Updated A25.

Things that have not been done:

- No use-case on emergency services added (as said already in 
http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/rtcweb/current/msg07253.html)

- No use-case on real-time text added (as said already in
http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/rtcweb/current/msg07254.html)

- No clarification on what solution(s) related to multiple resolutions 
of the same content added (discussed in 
http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/rtcweb/current/msg07256.html but no 
input received).

- The order of the requirements (Fn) is still a mess - but I kept it as 
is for this version to make diffing simpler. To be fixed in an upcoming 
version.

Stefan


-------- Original Message --------
Subject: New Version Notification for 
draft-ietf-rtcweb-use-cases-and-requirements-11.txt
Date: 10:40
From: internet-drafts@ietf.org <internet-drafts@ietf.org>;
To: Christer Holmberg <christer.holmberg@ericsson.com>;,    Göran 
Eriksson AP <goran.ap.eriksson@ericsson.com>;,    Stefan Håkansson LK 
<stefan.lk.hakansson@ericsson.com>;,    Göran Eriksson AP 
<goran.ap.eriksson@ericsson.com>;


A new version of I-D, draft-ietf-rtcweb-use-cases-and-requirements-11.txt
has been successfully submitted by Christer Holmberg and posted to the
IETF repository.

Filename:	 draft-ietf-rtcweb-use-cases-and-requirements
Revision:	 11
Title:		 Web Real-Time Communication Use-cases and Requirements
Creation date:	 2013-06-27
Group:		 rtcweb
Number of pages: 30
URL: 
http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-rtcweb-use-cases-and-requirements-11.txt
Status: 
http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-rtcweb-use-cases-and-requirements
Htmlized: 
http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-rtcweb-use-cases-and-requirements-11
Diff: 
http://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=draft-ietf-rtcweb-use-cases-and-requirements-11

Abstract:
    This document describes web based real-time communication use-cases.
    Requirements on the browser functionality are derived from use-cases.

 



The IETF Secretariat