Re: [rtcweb] non-standard codecs

Silvia Pfeiffer <> Tue, 31 July 2012 01:18 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 709CA11E80EC for <>; Mon, 30 Jul 2012 18:18:52 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -3.599
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1]
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id wPzTiLudSedo for <>; Mon, 30 Jul 2012 18:18:47 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7795711E8091 for <>; Mon, 30 Jul 2012 18:18:47 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by vcbfo14 with SMTP id fo14so5571223vcb.31 for <>; Mon, 30 Jul 2012 18:18:47 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc:content-type; bh=oh7sT+unrJEgFPDWVvWPrHOunHaGsHtYd6VDtHYmGGM=; b=LG871xHJQJrWVJwZCjwUxnMezF6qv4Xuzt/kmEUjzHbJzyfsZkQ4XnfFbfAYLYC0Qc 6/Llv6nQxnW7bbebd6A1Y8WioNYFmY50p8LGEHtQIMJfy1570mt8VqgSGP/4t5QsZP5T Ha1VojWa/BHy/869A5JAipoOg96sYEr7X/eBPZYbjSrRtU/vwFTDdk+rIhRDIy39g0HL JSLCEnswpZWJ7NU8THwG+qyAoHSQGnEwSojm//WHHiifSZyxqOmJUJysi/PzcDqSxLhb +DBV2BpQbjYVam3qDsxvbhNNDNUZPtcsX4/BrAvWtNbqK4crLnEhub7DPcNS/+tqTrla 1eog==
Received: by with SMTP id eh5mr11243267vdb.8.1343697526982; Mon, 30 Jul 2012 18:18:46 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by with HTTP; Mon, 30 Jul 2012 18:18:25 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <>
References: <> <>
From: Silvia Pfeiffer <>
Date: Tue, 31 Jul 2012 11:18:25 +1000
Message-ID: <>
To: Stephan Wenger <>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Cc: "" <>
Subject: Re: [rtcweb] non-standard codecs
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
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: Tue, 31 Jul 2012 01:18:52 -0000

On Tue, Jul 31, 2012 at 9:01 AM, Stephan Wenger <> wrote:
> Hi Silvia,
> On 7.30.2012 15:18 , "Silvia Pfeiffer" <> wrote:
>>>>It's an IETF document and therefore not subject to change without IETF
>>> While an RFC is static, this RFC is NOT an IETF document.  It's the end
>>> result of an independent submission to the RFC editor.  It's not an IETF
>>> product, and it's not under IETF "change control".  Btw., wikipedia got
>>> that doc status wrong as well; you are not alone :-)
>>Oh, I'm fully aware of the informal state of this document. However,
>>IETF still has change control - they can still stop any further
>>submissions / updates of that document. After all, they are the
> It's an independent submission to the RFC editor, and not an IETF
> document.  This page explains what those independent submissions are:
> It is not an IETF document, and the IETF has no change control.  The IETF
> cannot stop any further submissions or updates unless the IESG finds that
> the doc is harmful to the Internet, and AFAIK, the IETF is not the
> publisher of the doc.

Depends on what you understand by "the IETF". The RFC editor and the
IESG can stop it and they are part of IETF processes.

Also, the document is published on a domain and has the
following copyright statement:
Copyright (c) 2011 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the
document authors.  All rights reserved.
As I read it, the IETF is the publisher for all intents and purposes.