Re: [rtcweb] Question about the status of various drafts

"Hutton, Andrew" <andrew.hutton@siemens-enterprise.com> Thu, 11 July 2013 10:19 UTC

Return-Path: <andrew.hutton@siemens-enterprise.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 7076321F9FEA for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 11 Jul 2013 03:19:17 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.505
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.505 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.095, BAYES_00=-2.599]
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 rkUZ9AUvoJ4Y for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 11 Jul 2013 03:19:13 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from senmx11-mx.siemens-enterprise.com (senmx11-mx.siemens-enterprise.com [62.134.46.9]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0229B21F9FE9 for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Thu, 11 Jul 2013 03:19:13 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from MCHP01HTC.global-ad.net (unknown [172.29.42.234]) by senmx11-mx.siemens-enterprise.com (Server) with ESMTP id 0D0F61EB85D5; Thu, 11 Jul 2013 12:19:10 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from MCHP04MSX.global-ad.net ([169.254.1.137]) by MCHP01HTC.global-ad.net ([172.29.42.234]) with mapi id 14.03.0123.003; Thu, 11 Jul 2013 12:19:09 +0200
From: "Hutton, Andrew" <andrew.hutton@siemens-enterprise.com>
To: Cullen Jennings <fluffy@iii.ca>, "rtcweb@ietf.org" <rtcweb@ietf.org>
Thread-Topic: [rtcweb] Question about the status of various drafts
Thread-Index: AQHOeRlA+vvnmXNqhUeR61l9KjX9j5lfTEdg
Date: Thu, 11 Jul 2013 10:19:07 +0000
Message-ID: <9F33F40F6F2CD847824537F3C4E37DDF1163E4A1@MCHP04MSX.global-ad.net>
References: <7A95191A-6488-435E-B491-FEF3A6AC342F@iii.ca>
In-Reply-To: <7A95191A-6488-435E-B491-FEF3A6AC342F@iii.ca>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-originating-ip: [172.29.42.225]
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
Subject: Re: [rtcweb] Question about the status of various drafts
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, 11 Jul 2013 10:19:17 -0000

There are things missing from the list.

For example the charter and the requirements indicate that we need to address the firewall issue so we need a draft for that.

I hope we will adopt draft-hutton-rtcweb-nat-firewall-considerations to cover this and of course assuming we do then I think it is nearly done but others might think differently. 

I have not been through the requirements document to see if there are other things missing.

Regards
Andy



> -----Original Message-----
> From: rtcweb-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:rtcweb-bounces@ietf.org] On
> Behalf Of Cullen Jennings
> Sent: 05 July 2013 01:47
> To: rtcweb@ietf.org
> Subject: [rtcweb] Question about the status of various drafts
> 
> 
> As part of putting together some chair slides for Berlin, I'm trying to
> get a very rough idea of where things are. I'd like to get folks input
> on what percent done various drafts are where Done is a published RFC.
> 
> This is nearly impossible to do at any level of accuracy but I do want
> to get a vague idea. I took a very rough stab below just to have a
> starting point to get the conversation going. I'm sure my numbers are
> mostly wrong but I have tried to ask a few people and sort of take the
> central cluster of the guess. If you think I am way out, please provide
> some feedback of what you think the number actually is.
> 
> I'm happy to get feedback on specific drafts or feedback of the form
> they are all too low or too high. I do encourage people to
> realistically look at the data tracker to see how long other drafts
> have taken for each stage to get a baseline instead of just going with
> their gut feel.
> 
> Thanks, Cullen
> 
> PS - if you are an author and look at the number next to your draft and
> think it is way off, please please, say something.
> 
> 
> 
> draft-ietf-rtcweb-overview		80
> draft-ietf-rtcweb-use-cases-and-requirements	70
> http://dev.w3.org/2011/webrtc/editor/getusermedia.html	70
> draft-burnett-rtcweb-constraints-registry		80
> http://dev.w3.org/2011/webrtc/editor/webrtc.html	50
> draft-nandakumar-rtcweb-stun-uri		80
> draft-petithuguenin-behave-turn-uris		80
> draft-ietf-rtcweb-security		80
> draft-ietf-rtcweb-security-arch		80
> draft-muthu-behave-consent-freshness-02 	50
> draft-ietf-rtcweb-data-channel		70
> draft-ietf-mmusic-sctp-sdp		70
> draft-jesup-rtcweb-data-protocol 		50
> draft-ietf-tsvwg-sctp-dtls-encaps		70
> draft-ietf-rtcweb-rtp-usage		40
> draft-ietf-avtcore-6222bis		80
> draft-ietf-avtcore-avp-codecs		80
> draft-ietf-avtcore-srtp-encrypted-header-ext	80
> draft-ietf-avtext-multiple-clock-rates		70
> draft-lennox-rtcweb-rtp-media-type-mux 		80
> draft-ietf-avtcore-rtp-circuit-breakers		70
> draft-ietf-avtcore-multi-media-rtp-session 	70
> draft-lennox-avtcore-rtp-multi-stream		70
> draft-ietf-rtcweb-jsep		50
> draft-ietf-mmusic-msid		70
> draft-rescorla-mmusic-ice-trickle		25
> draft-ietf-mmusic-sdp-bundle-negotiation	50
> draft-nandakumar-mmusic-sdp-mux-attributes	25
> draft-dhesikan-tsvwg-rtcweb-qos		10 or 90
> draft-ietf-rtcweb-audio		50
> draft-ietf-payload-rtp-opus		90
> draft-ietf-payload-vp8-08		95
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> rtcweb mailing list
> rtcweb@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rtcweb