IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [rtcweb] Dependencies on drafts in our documents

"DRAGE, Keith (Keith)" <keith.drage@alcatel-lucent.com> Wed, 14 August 2013 11:58 UTC

Return-Path: <keith.drage@alcatel-lucent.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 1980E21E8086 for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 14 Aug 2013 04:58:19 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -110.632
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-110.632 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.033, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-8, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
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 CH-1SFecSj-o for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 14 Aug 2013 04:58:13 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ihemail1.lucent.com (ihemail1.lucent.com [135.245.0.33]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A13A721E805D for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Wed, 14 Aug 2013 04:58:13 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from fr711usmtp1.zeu.alcatel-lucent.com (h135-239-2-122.lucent.com [135.239.2.122]) by ihemail1.lucent.com (8.13.8/IER-o) with ESMTP id r7EBw5Ci019864 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=FAIL); Wed, 14 Aug 2013 06:58:07 -0500 (CDT)
Received: from FR711WXCHHUB02.zeu.alcatel-lucent.com (fr711wxchhub02.zeu.alcatel-lucent.com [135.239.2.112]) by fr711usmtp1.zeu.alcatel-lucent.com (GMO) with ESMTP id r7EBw43K026694 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=FAIL); Wed, 14 Aug 2013 13:58:05 +0200
Received: from FR712WXCHMBA11.zeu.alcatel-lucent.com ([169.254.7.194]) by FR711WXCHHUB02.zeu.alcatel-lucent.com ([135.239.2.112]) with mapi id 14.02.0247.003; Wed, 14 Aug 2013 13:58:05 +0200
From: "DRAGE, Keith (Keith)" <keith.drage@alcatel-lucent.com>
To: Harald Alvestrand <harald@alvestrand.no>, "rtcweb@ietf.org" <rtcweb@ietf.org>
Thread-Topic: [rtcweb] Dependencies on drafts in our documents
Thread-Index: AQHOmOG8YBYEeWVYfEix6LJ/yaxjb5mUmMCQ
Date: Wed, 14 Aug 2013 11:58:04 +0000
Message-ID: <949EF20990823C4C85C18D59AA11AD8B0822E7@FR712WXCHMBA11.zeu.alcatel-lucent.com>
References: <520B6A59.1050104@alvestrand.no>
In-Reply-To: <520B6A59.1050104@alvestrand.no>
Accept-Language: en-GB, en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-originating-ip: [135.239.27.40]
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.57 on 135.245.2.33
Subject: Re: [rtcweb] Dependencies on drafts in our documents
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: Wed, 14 Aug 2013 11:58:19 -0000

I assume implementation of the unified decision into the drafts will produce a whole set of other dependencies.

The best view of that at the moment is Adam's slides in the second RFCWEB session in Berlin.

I guess it depends whether you want the situation at the moment, or something to plan the work going forward, as to whether you include those or not.

Regards

Keith

> -----Original Message-----
> From: rtcweb-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:rtcweb-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf
> Of Harald Alvestrand
> Sent: 14 August 2013 12:31
> To: rtcweb@ietf.org
> Subject: [rtcweb] Dependencies on drafts in our documents
> 
> Greetings,
> 
> department of small hacks: As part of updating the -overview document, I
> wrote a small dependency graph extractor, to see what we are looking at
> in terms of getting things done.
> 
> Here's what I came up with as direct and indirect *normative*
> dependencies for -overview (with all the normal caveats for text
> processing utilities invented from scratch in an afternoon):
> 
> draft-ietf-avtcore-6222bis
> draft-ietf-avtcore-rtp-multi-stream
> draft-ietf-avtcore-rtp-multi-stream-optimisation
> draft-ietf-mmusic-sctp-sdp
> draft-ietf-rtcweb-audio
> draft-ietf-rtcweb-data-channel
> draft-ietf-rtcweb-jsep
> draft-ietf-rtcweb-overview
> draft-ietf-rtcweb-rtp-usage
> draft-ietf-rtcweb-security
> draft-ietf-rtcweb-security-arch
> draft-ietf-tsvwg-sctp-dtls-encaps
> draft-jesup-rtcweb-data-protocol
> draft-muthu-behave-consent-freshness
> draft-nandakumar-rtcweb-stun-uri
> draft-rescorla-mmusic-ice-trickle
> draft-tuexen-tsvwg-sctp-dtls-encaps
> 
> There's also these links that don't reference any current draft:
> 
> Missing file: draft-rescorla-mmusic-ice-trickle-00 in
> internet-drafts/draft-ietf-rtcweb-jsep-03.txt
> Missing file: draft-tuexen-tsvwg-sctp-dtls-encaps-01 in
> internet-drafts/draft-ietf-mmusic-sctp-sdp-04.txt
> Missing file: draft-tuexen-tsvwg-sctp-dtls-encaps-01 in
> internet-drafts/draft-ietf-rtcweb-overview-06.txt
> 
> Now - apart from those drafts - do the chairs or the participants know
> of OTHER drafts that should be referenced, directly or indirectly, from
> the -overview draft?
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> rtcweb mailing list
> rtcweb@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rtcweb

v2.27.8 | Report a Bug | By Email | System Status