[tram] Question about scope of TRAM

[Harald Alvestrand <[e-mail]>]

On the RTCWEB list, the following claim was made:

> Here, in TRAM we want to go beyond Level 4 QoS (already available and
> working as good as it can on the Internet), to give quality demanding WebRTC
> real-time traffic better QoE by:
> a. Forcing real-time traffic into IP-pipes having Level 2 QoS (using
> auto-discovered TURN servers)
> or
> b. Forcing real-time traffic into IP-pipes having Level 3 QoS (using
> auto-discovered TURN servers). Here we must have traffic shaping mechanisms
> working, and with correct and sufficient information to do the job. This is
> why we in TRAM discuss DISCUSS/MALICE,
> draft-thomson-tram-turn-bandwidth-00.txt attributes and recreating the
> payload type (PT) idea/intent in RTP packets (by now conveying bandwidth and
> traffic type in the RTP extension header
> http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/rtcweb/current/msg09129.html.
>

Before reacting to that, I want to check:

Is it the opinion of the TRAM chairs that this is a fair description of 
a subject that is being actively discussed in the TRAM WG?

         Harald