Subject: [straw] RTCP document: Proposed Standard or Best Current Practice?

From: Lorenzo Miniero <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 10 Jun 2016 12:46:34 +0200

Hi all,

I just published a new version of the RTCP document, that hopefully
now addresses all the very useful comments Ben provided in his
latest detailed review:

https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-straw-b2bua-rtcp-12

One last notable point remains to be clarified, that is related to the
intended scope of the document. The draft is currently "Standards
Track", something Ben is not sure about, considering this might mean
expecting B2BUA developers to implement this. Besides, the document is
more trying to discipline the behaviour of components that, for one
reason or another, are not always adhering to specifications that
should already prevent the broken behaviours the draft tries to
address. In order to make sure the WG would be aware of this discussion
and not have it buried under the other discussions we had around the
document itself, Ben suggested to open a new post to discuss
specifically about this and get the WG's feeling on the matter.

As I said a few posts ago, I'd rather keep the document "Proposed
Standard" than changing it to a "Best Current Practice", mainly because
we want it to have an actual impact and stress the importance of doing
things right in that context. Besides, the DTLS-SRTP document was
published as "Standards Track" too, and I believe the aim of the two
documents was similar. Anyway, I obviously wouldn't fight changing it to
"Best Current Practice", as we are talking about guidelines on the
behaviour to follow.

What is your opinion on this? Any reason to change the scope of the
document, or any reason not to?

Thanks!
Lorenzo

---

From: Christer Holmberg <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 10 Jun 2016 10:50:41 +0000

(As co-chair)

Hi,

Just to point out that, apart from the taxonomy document, all STRAW
deliverables so far haven been ³Standards Track².

Regards,

Christer

On 10/06/16 13:46, "straw on behalf of Lorenzo Miniero"
<[email-masked] on behalf of [email-masked]> wrote:

>_______________________________________________
>straw mailing list
>[email-masked]
>https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/straw

---

From: Christer Holmberg <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 16 Jun 2016 06:13:06 +0000

(As co-chair)

Hi,

Does anyone object to moving forward as “Standards Track”, considering
that is what we’ll used for the other STRAW deliverables too?

Regards,

Christer