IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [rtcweb] Why the Straw Poll

Mary Barnes <mary.ietf.barnes@gmail.com> Thu, 12 December 2013 16:24 UTC

Return-Path: <mary.ietf.barnes@gmail.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 66F571AE353 for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 12 Dec 2013 08:24:56 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.999
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.999 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham
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 90YGfaV0DcpT for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 12 Dec 2013 08:24:53 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-wg0-x22e.google.com (mail-wg0-x22e.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:400c:c00::22e]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id CD52E1ADFE0 for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Thu, 12 Dec 2013 08:24:52 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-wg0-f46.google.com with SMTP id m15so673132wgh.25 for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Thu, 12 Dec 2013 08:24:46 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type; bh=5owd58sKsl+GpGcVsSmwUAhfxBYrLZHXYIRJEYeVLls=; b=Fw5eSUPvndgk2Xcah0iEoe/bgfULFRh0NGZTk7Ay1j0VEt9DglLiWw0psMiXcVepp+ e0AhKA2BsZyKn/5ETJuh7oYD5qoUPGC5gZuZnKetQTcIjH35g/AEujowOmjiHr1NRrYU udg5zlYSC7xwF756btchtCxd3eZUvcU41UvBVcaz6H2xdAFkP2cM/mpPymYVJyfBwwSj L9QPeaAG7OlKwh/ky/0nIKQxch5P04XyoSUBdPxllNQVw5JlZYqsuNel65mQM1LAEir8 FCBCF6D8OSwK/N6lOjyklzE0gE4Ajxk7cA9B70cCjyuutLmd+zVXuBaQPXDXsusS61Ct o5Kw==
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.194.185.73 with SMTP id fa9mr7436929wjc.29.1386865486425; Thu, 12 Dec 2013 08:24:46 -0800 (PST)
Received: by 10.216.172.9 with HTTP; Thu, 12 Dec 2013 08:24:46 -0800 (PST)
In-Reply-To: <52A9D698.4050503@ericsson.com>
References: <CA+9kkMBSpDLJBBbPxgyMUi+bi3aw3D8zpSXcAvQ4koi115QqBg@mail.gmail.com> <AE1A6B5FD507DC4FB3C5166F3A05A48441927F3A@TK5EX14MBXC295.redmond.corp.microsoft.com> <8ADFF7AF-FEBD-43D5-BB10-EAF53BB9F8BD@cisco.com> <949EF20990823C4C85C18D59AA11AD8B0F6F57@FR712WXCHMBA11.zeu.alcatel-lucent.com> <52A9D698.4050503@ericsson.com>
Date: Thu, 12 Dec 2013 10:24:46 -0600
Message-ID: <CAHBDyN6A_NiuMo+s54S68HHVGbgBtqnjZVFaPVNmLrr5VQ_hbA@mail.gmail.com>
From: Mary Barnes <mary.ietf.barnes@gmail.com>
To: Magnus Westerlund <magnus.westerlund@ericsson.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="047d7bd6b048ab733704ed58c888"
Cc: "rtcweb@ietf.org" <rtcweb@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [rtcweb] Why the Straw Poll
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: <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, 12 Dec 2013 16:24:56 -0000

It's also very important (and IMHO more important) to consider the
documents in other WGs upon which RTCWEB WG deliverables are dependent. For
example, JSEP has some major dependencies in MMUSIC:
http://www.fenron.net/~fenner/ietf/deps/index.cgi?dep=draft-ietf-rtcweb-jsep

While the entirety of the WG focus has been on lack of interoperability if
there is no MTI codec, without the docs in MMUSIC being completed, you have
even more basic interop problems.

Regards,
Mary


On Thu, Dec 12, 2013 at 9:30 AM, Magnus Westerlund <
magnus.westerlund@ericsson.com> wrote:

> Hi Keith,
>
> Dropping other lists than WG list.
>
> On 2013-12-12 13:40, DRAGE, Keith (Keith) wrote:
>
> > P.S. And I did ask a few messages back which documents the chairs
> > want to work on with higher priority, and I have had no response. So
> > obviously they only want the WG to work on video codec MTI.
> >
>
> Sorry,
>
> I missed that in my reading of your previous message.
>
> First of all we need to progress basically all of the current WG
> documents to finish up to have a working solution:
> https://datatracker.ietf.org/wg/rtcweb/
>
> However, I think JSEP and the Data Channel + Protocol drafts are two
> sets of documents I would recommend to focus on currently. JSEP because
> I think it has quite a lot of work left to be done. Data channel +
> protocol because these are getting into the finishing up phase.
>
> The security, security architecture and RTP usage there will be updates
> hopefully soon. So those will need reviews as soon as the updates become
> available.
>
> We have three smaller documents that all can benefit from review by a
> larger community. These are:
> draft-ietf-rtcweb-transports-01
> draft-ietf-rtcweb-stun-consent-freshness-00
> draft-ietf-rtcweb-audio-03
>
> So please review the document or documents you fell most comfortable
> with contributing and send your comments to the authors and the list. If
> you have text proposals for improvements, even better.
>
> cheers
>
> Magnus Westerlund
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> Multimedia Technologies, Ericsson Research EAB/TVM
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> Ericsson AB                | Phone  +46 10 7148287
> Färögatan 6                | Mobile +46 73 0949079
> SE-164 80 Stockholm, Sweden| mailto: magnus.westerlund@ericsson.com
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> _______________________________________________
> rtcweb mailing list
> rtcweb@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rtcweb
>

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email