Subject: [AVT] Rapid Acquisition of Multicast RTP Sessions (RAMS)" draft , revision 3

From: "VAN CAENEGEM Tom" <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 30 Apr 2009 20:19:37 +0200

Hi Roni and all other IETF AVT WG participants,

Considering that the "Rapid Acquisition of Multicast RTP Sessions
(RAMS)" draft (revision 3)

-has taken into account many of the remarks that came out of the
break-out session in the San Francisco meeting
-includes the flexible burst rate adaptation capability, the prime
differentiator in the "draft-peilin-avt-rtp-burst" from previous
versions of the RAMS draft, and as such the RAMS draft has now merged
and integrated the solutions proposed in three different originating
drafts. 
-has included adequate flexibility by allowing TLV fields in the
signaling messages, allowing other concepts to leverage the solution in
the future (including potentially a multicast-based solution as proposed
in draft-johansson-avt-mcast-based-rams-00).

, I would like to know whether there is still a blocking issue for
preventing this draft from becoming a working group item.

I followed with great interest in the last weeks the SDP discussions
related to the SDP signaling example in the RAMS v 3 draft (I am
unfortunately not sufficiently experienced in that domain to
contribute), where the latest shared opinions make me think that this is
not really a blocking item.

Considering that the 1st draft was submitted back in august last year,
and the various subsequent revisions and merges since then, can we now
proceed with the draft as a working group subject?

Kind Regards,
Tom Van Caenegem (co-author of the "Rapid Acquisition of Multicast
RTPSessions (RAMS)" draft)