Re: [Sframe] [dispatch] Magnus Westerlund's Block on charter-ietf-sframe-00-00: (with BLOCK and COMMENT)

[Magnus Westerlund <[e-mail]>]

On Mon, 2020-09-14 at 21:43 +0200, Sergio Garcia Murillo wrote:
> On 14/09/2020 20:45, Bernard Aboba wrote:
> > 
> > Given that we don't have a lot of deployment of frame forwarding RTP 
> > header extensions yet, it's probably best to avoid tying SFRAME  to 
> > any particular design.  For example, you wouldn't want a design that 
> > could only function with the framemarking RTP header extension or the 
> > Generic Frame Descriptor or the Dependency Descriptor, so that a new 
> > specification is needed when the N+1 frame forwarding technology comes 
> > along.
> > 
> 


For this all points to that SFRAME WG shall not do the RTP Payload format,
instead that work shall be done in AVTCORE WG. Thus, everything for SFRAME that
has to do with RTP will be dealt with in AVTCORE and to my knowledge this is
within the charter of AVTCORE. However, maybe the SFRAME charter should be
explicit about that this shuold be noted in a paragraph in the SFRAME WG charter
that the WG will collaborate on this aspect. Because I will assume that there
will be some aspects that will flow from the RTP Payload format work towards the
SFRAME format. 

Cheers

Magnus Westerlund 


----------------------------------------------------------------------
Networks, Ericsson Research
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Ericsson AB                 | Mobile [phone]
Torshamnsgatan 23           |
SE-164 80 Stockholm, Sweden | mailto: [e-mail]
----------------------------------------------------------------------