IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [rtcweb] draft-roach-mmusic-unified-plan status

Adam Roach <adam@nostrum.com> Sun, 28 February 2016 17:22 UTC

Return-Path: <adam@nostrum.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 9902D1A8760 for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 28 Feb 2016 09:22:46 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.606
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.606 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, MIME_8BIT_HEADER=0.3, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.006] autolearn=no
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 EoD6CqGdajza for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 28 Feb 2016 09:22:45 -0800 (PST)
Received: from nostrum.com (raven-v6.nostrum.com [IPv6:2001:470:d:1130::1]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C5D081A875C for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Sun, 28 Feb 2016 09:22:45 -0800 (PST)
Received: from Orochi.local (99-152-145-110.lightspeed.dllstx.sbcglobal.net [99.152.145.110]) (authenticated bits=0) by nostrum.com (8.15.2/8.14.9) with ESMTPSA id u1SHMdjG060608 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128 verify=NO); Sun, 28 Feb 2016 11:22:40 -0600 (CST) (envelope-from adam@nostrum.com)
X-Authentication-Warning: raven.nostrum.com: Host 99-152-145-110.lightspeed.dllstx.sbcglobal.net [99.152.145.110] claimed to be Orochi.local
To: Iñaki Baz Castillo <ibc@aliax.net>, "rtcweb@ietf.org" <rtcweb@ietf.org>
References: <CALiegf=kC3aPrcvgpKS4RsY14H5zcv2boK4oxkwCZa5tAWEL5A@mail.gmail.com>
From: Adam Roach <adam@nostrum.com>
Message-ID: <56D32CDF.1010001@nostrum.com>
Date: Sun, 28 Feb 2016 11:22:39 -0600
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.10; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/38.6.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <CALiegf=kC3aPrcvgpKS4RsY14H5zcv2boK4oxkwCZa5tAWEL5A@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/rtcweb/fatUI8O1vFLe9JrObCBKA0ePvRQ>
Subject: Re: [rtcweb] draft-roach-mmusic-unified-plan status
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: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/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: Sun, 28 Feb 2016 17:22:46 -0000

Unified plan was never intended to be an implementation spec. It (along 
with the plan-a and plan-b documents) described an approach for the 
purpose of having a working group discussion on the topic. It was purely 
an internal working group document. It served its purpose, and is finished.

The actual implementation details associated with the approach it 
describes appear in the various SDP-related documents produced by RTCWEB 
and MMUSIC, such as the JSEP and simulcast documents.

/a

On 2/28/16 10:11, Iñaki Baz Castillo wrote:
> Hi,
>
> What is the status of draft-roach-mmusic-unified-plan? There have been
> no new draft versions since the first one written in 2013. Is
> draft-roach-mmusic-unified-plan-00 up-to-date?
>
> Firefox already implements it (I will check soon whether it conforms
> to the spec in draft-roach-mmusic-unified-plan-00 or not), and Chrome
> is supposed to implement it in Q1 2016.
>
> So, shouldn't the draft get more love? I just cannot expect that it
> does not need changes after ~3 years...
>

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email