Subject: [AVT] AVT agenda for Atlanta

From: Colin Perkins <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 13 Nov 2002 19:48:48 -0500

Folks,

Enclosed is the agenda for the AVT meeting in Atlanta.

Those who have agenda time scheduled are requested to prepare a summary of
the issues they wish to discuss, and to send this to the mailing list ahead
of the meeting. This gives those who won't be attending the opportunity to
post their comments and concerns, and potentially even reach some consensus,
before the meeting time is consumed. It also gives other participants the
opportunity to consider the issue in more depth. Summary messages should be
sent to the mailing list by Friday 15th November.

We also request that all presenters send us their slides at least one
day ahead of time, preferably in PDF format. This has multiple purposes:

  - It streamlines the presentation process by having the presentations on
    a single laptop.

  - It avoids the delay that sometimes occurs in getting the presentations
    sent to us after the meeting, for inclusion in the minutes.

  - It allows us to preview the presentations to see if they are following
    the guidelines for what should be covered during the meeting.

Agenda time is conditional on sending both a summary of open issues and a
copy of your slides ahead of the meeting, and 5 minutes ahead doesn't count!

Those presenting new drafts: briefly describe the basic problem and your
proposed solution, discuss known issues, limitations and problems, outline
where you want input from the working group, and how you wish us to
proceed.  When presenting work which has been previously discussed:
describe only the changes from the previous draft, highlight unresolved
problems, and propose future directions. Presenters are reminded of the
requirements for disclosure of intellectual property relating to
contributions, in section 10 of RFC 2026.

We strongly encourage all participants to read all relevent drafts before
the meeting, and to comment on the open issues raised on the mailing list.

Thanks for your assistance to try to conduct an effective meeting.

Colin & Steve

===============================================================================
Audio/Video Transport Working Group

CHAIRS: Steve Casner <[email-masked]>
        Colin Perkins <[email-masked]>

Tuesday, 19 November at 09:00-11:30
===================================

Introduction and status update				(Casner/Perkins)   15
	draft-kreuter-avt-rtp-clearmode-00.txt
	draft-ietf-avt-dsr-05.txt
	draft-ietf-avt-smpte292-video-07.txt
	Resolution of G.726 payload format endian-issue

The MIDI Wire Protocol Packetization (MWPP)		(Perkins)           5
	draft-ietf-avt-mwpp-midi-rtp-05.txt
	draft-lazzaro-avt-mwpp-coding-guidelines-00.txt

RTP end-to-end liveness test				(Schulzrinne)	   10

RTP Payload for DTMF Digits, Tones and Signals 		(Schulzrinne)	    5
	draft-ietf-avt-rfc2833bis-01.txt

RTP Payload Format for iLBC				(Duric)		   15
	draft-ietf-avt-rtp-ilbc-00.txt
	draft-ietf-avt-ilbc-codec-00.txt

RTP Payload Format for ATRAC-X				(Romaine)	   15
	draft-hatanaka-avt-rtp-atracx-00.txt

RTP Payload Format for Uncompressed Video		(Gharai)	   15
	draft-ietf-avt-uncomp-video-01.txt

Resolution of comments on draft-ietf-avt-srtp-05.txt	(Casner)	   15

Wednesday, 20 November at 13:00-15:00
=====================================

MIME Type Registration for MPEG-4			(Lim)		   15
	draft-lim-mpeg4-mime-01.txt

RTP Payload Format for MPEG-4				(van der Meer)     15

RTP Payload Format for JVT Video 			(Wenger)	   15
	draft-ietf-avt-rtp-h264-00.txt

RTCP Reporting Extensions 				(Clark)		   15
	draft-ietf-avt-rtcp-report-extns-01.txt

Retransmission						(Leon)		   15
	draft-ietf-avt-rtp-retransmission-03.txt

RGL codec and payload format				(Ramalho)	   15

_______________________________________________
Audio/Video Transport Working Group
[email-masked]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/avt

---

From: Ranjith Mukundan <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 14 Nov 2002 11:57:23 +0530

List, Colin & Steve:

Apologies for bringing this up at the eleventh hour.

I would like to check the possibility of a discussion slot at the AVT WG meeting to
*briefly* discuss on a new RTP profile that we need to support for on-hook/off-hook
voiceband data transmission over RTP using the encoding rules (SDMF, MDMF, GDMF) &
procedures for the same, as defined in TR-57, GR-30 & GR-31. In circuit switched
world, this is primarily used to transfer the calling line ID information, Visual
Message Waiting Indicator, caller ID on a call waiting call etc from an IDT
(logical part of a central office)  to an RDT (remote digital terminal), over a DLC
interface (like GR-303) without actually DTMF/MF encoding the digits. This
requirements stems from a need to implement the DLC system over a packet network.

Due to a scheduling oversight on our part, this bubbled up our priority list quite
late - and hence we are now very close to the deadline, if not too late already, to
request for an official slot on the AVT WG meeting.

As the requirment is quite straight-foward, we are of the opinion that a brief
informal discussion would also help/suffice - and might not need a slot on AVT WG
meeting, after all. But all the same, do please let us know if a slot (5-10 mins
max) for this can be squeezed into to AVT agenda, if it is not too late already. I
shall post 2-3 slides and any other info (summary of requirements etc) that you
folks think would be relevant to the list, before we can take this up for
discussion in Atlanta.

As the I-D for detailing this requirement is going to be very brief, we felt that
it would help do a viability check on this list and analyse the need rather than
first submit an I-D.

Please to let us know your thoughts.

regards,
ranjith..

---

From: Colin Perkins <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 14 Nov 2002 09:28:49 -0500

Ranjith,

--> Ranjith Mukundan writes:
>I would like to check the possibility of a discussion slot at the AVT WG
>meeting to *briefly* discuss on a new RTP profile that we need to support
>for on-hook/off-hook voiceband data transmission over RTP using the
>encoding rules (SDMF, MDMF, GDMF) & procedures for the same, as defined in
>TR-57, GR-30 & GR-31. In circuit switched world, this is primarily used to
>transfer the calling line ID information, Visual Message Waiting Indicator,
>caller ID on a call waiting call etc from an IDT (logical part of a central
>office)  to an RDT (remote digital terminal), over a DLC interface (like
>GR-303) without actually DTMF/MF encoding the digits. This requirements
>stems from a need to implement the DLC system over a packet network.

I'm not familiar with most of those acronyms, but this sounds like it may
be similar to RFC 2833? Also, what would be the relation to the signaling
channel?

>Due to a scheduling oversight on our part, this bubbled up our priority
>list quite late - and hence we are now very close to the deadline, if not
>too late already, to request for an official slot on the AVT WG meeting.

It's too late to get agenda time in the meeting, especially given that
there is no I-D to discuss. I'd be happy to talk informally in Atlanta
or on the list.

>As the requirment is quite straight-foward, we are of the opinion that a
>brief informal discussion would also help/suffice - and might not need a
>slot on AVT WG meeting, after all. But all the same, do please let us know
>if a slot (5-10 mins max) for this can be squeezed into to AVT agenda, if
>it is not too late already. I shall post 2-3 slides and any other info
>(summary of requirements etc) that you folks think would be relevant to the
>list, before we can take this up for discussion in Atlanta.
>
>As the I-D for detailing this requirement is going to be very brief, we
>felt that it would help do a viability check on this list and analyse the
>need rather than first submit an I-D.

If you could send more details, that would be helpful.
Colin
_______________________________________________
Audio/Video Transport Working Group
[email-masked]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/avt

---

From: "Ranjith Mukundan" <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 18 Nov 2002 22:02:40 +0530

In-line [ranjith]....

-----Original Message-----
From: Colin Perkins [mailto:[email-masked]] 
Sent: Thursday, November 14, 2002 7:59 PM
To: [email-masked]
Cc: [email-masked]
Subject: Re: [AVT] AVT agenda for Atlanta 

Ranjith,

>stems from a need to implement the DLC system over a packet network.

I'm not familiar with most of those acronyms, but this sounds like it
may
be similar to RFC 2833? Also, what would be the relation to the
signaling
channel?

[ranjith]
Yes, it would be similar to RFC2833, we just need to define one more
payload type and the concomitant RTP profile. Taking it a step further,
the GRs for voice-band data txn (esp GR30) does not have any field in
the encoded message assembly layer to distinguish between the 3 possible
encoding types - SDMF/MDMF/GDMF. But, whilst transporting these frames
over RTP, it would infact be more efficient to define 3 payload types
instead of just one to identify the 3 possible framing formats used for
transporting the voiceband data.

It's relation to the signaling channel:
As I have mentioned, these frames are carried in-band, in the
dynamically or statically allocated bearer DS0s that will eventually be
used for the voice call after the session matures to the answer phase.
The D-channel (signaling channel) is just used to dynamically allocate
the ds0s and the rest of the line-side supervision (like providing an
indication of applying the first power-ringing cycle) happens in-band,
via RBS (for which, RFC2833 already defines the NSEs and the
corresponding payload types.  

[ranjith]
Sounds good, I'll touch base after the AVT WG meeting on Tuesday

[ranjith]
I guess it would probably be better to submit an ID with enough
background info. We'll do that after the 55th meeting.