Subject: Re: [MEDIACTRL] draft-ietf-mediactrl-mrb-01

From: Victor Pascual Avila <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 1 Oct 2009 11:35:55 +0200

Hi Lorenzo,

On Wed, Sep 30, 2009 at 3:06 PM, Lorenzo Miniero <[email-masked]> wrote:
(snip)
> Your points on the
> Mediactrl-vs-HTTP debate for what concerns the publishing interface
> have, as Chris said, already been discussed, since the protocols to use
> (with respect to both publisher and consumer interface) were the main
> argument of discussion at the latest meetings.

Excuse me, I missed that discussion. Could you please point to the
document which describes the technical requirements/arguments
supporting this decision?

Thanks a lot,
-- 
Victor Pascual Ávila

---

From: Lorenzo Miniero <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 1 Oct 2009 11:58:58 +0200

Hi Victor,

Chris already linked the MRB slides of the latest meetings, which
included the protocol discussion for both the interfaces. Anyway, for
more details, you can check the meetings proceedings:

    http://www.ietf.org/meeting/proceedings.html

where you'll be able to get the minutes of the meetings, summarizing
the points of discussions and the related decisions. For a more
realtime view of the meetings, there's the Jabber logs:

    http://jabber.ietf.org/logs/mediactrl/

I think the audio recordings of each meeting are available as well, in
the Audio Stream section of the proceedings: they are surely available
for the latest meeting, but they should be available for previous
meetings as well. The MRB has been mostly discussed from IETF 72 to 75,
even though the protocol choice for the interfaces was the main argument
only in Minneapolis (73) and San Francisco (74). In Stockholm we
discussed the publishing interface by itself.

Regards,
Lorenzo

On Thu, 1 Oct 2009 11:35:55 +0200

-- 
Lorenzo Miniero <[email-masked]>

---

From: John Dally <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 01 Oct 2009 14:23:12 +0100

Hello all,

I have been looking at the publish interface and from an applications 
point of view wouldn't they want to know some pretty high level stuff - 
like which packages the MS supports? (eg does it support mixing, IVR, 
etc). This information could be inferred from the supported-codecs tag 
in the publish interface, but should it be more explicitly defined in 
the publish interface?

  Cheers

     John

Chris Boulton wrote:
> All,
>
> As you may have noticed, I have posted a new version of the Media 
> Resource Brokering draft to the archives 
> (http://www.ietf.org/id/draft-ietf-mediactrl-mrb-01.txt).  This 
> version of the document represents a substantial leap forward after 
> all the hard work and input from the group over the last couple of 
> months.  The main updates are:
>
> - The inclusion of the In-line text that the group worked before 
> Stockholm.
> - The first draft of the MRB Publish interface.
>
> The text for the Publish interface and its associated schema are still 
> immature but provide a good representation of the output from the 
> design team.  It would be beneficial for the interface to be reviewed 
> and discussed over the coming weeks so that we can refine before the 
> next IETF meeting.  I will be releasing another version of the 
> document before Hiroshima which will:
>
> - progress the interface schema and its associated text based on group 
> feedback.
> - include a first draft of the Consumer interface.
> - Address as many of the editors notes as possible on the list.  Any 
> remaining will then be topic for discussion at the meeting.
>
> I would again like to thank everyone for the work so far and look 
> forward to receiving your input.
>
> Chris and Lorenzo.
>

---

From: "MUNSON, GARY A, ATTLABS" <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 2 Oct 2009 02:42:44 -0400

Sounds useful to me. I would vote to include.

Gary

-----Original Message-----
From: [email-masked] [mailto:[email-masked]] On
Behalf Of John Dally
Sent: Thursday, October 01, 2009 9:23 AM
Cc: [email-masked]
Subject: Re: [MEDIACTRL] draft-ietf-mediactrl-mrb-01

Hello all,

  Cheers

     John

> forward to receiving your input.

_______________________________________________
MEDIACTRL mailing list
[email-masked]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mediactrl
Supplemental Web Site:
http://www.standardstrack.com/ietf/mediactrl

---

From: Lorenzo Miniero <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 2 Oct 2009 10:19:35 +0200

Hi John,

good point, it will be in the next version of the draft. Actually we
already have info related to mixing, something IVR-related and so on,
but we only report package information per-functionality (e.g. "I
support this file format in msc-mixer but not in msc-ivr"), so I agree
that an explicit and generic package support is definitely a good thing
to have.

Thanks for your feedback,
Lorenzo

On Thu, 01 Oct 2009 14:23:12 +0100