Subject: [MMUSIC] Status of "Hitchhiker's Guide to SDP"

From: Bert Greevenbosch <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 5 Jul 2012 06:25:53 +0000

Hello all,

I have just uploaded a new version of the "Hitchhiker's Guide to SDP" draft:
http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-greevenbosch-mmusic-hitchhikersguide-sdp/

The main work done was identifying the drafts related to SDP, SIP, Megaco and RTSP. Gonzalo Salguiero and Yue Peiyu (Roy) have helped in this. In addition, I have copied some text from the original "Hitchhiker's Guide to SDP" (RFC 5411).

This is the current state of the work. However, we have some doubts about if this approach is the right one, especially as the document would become very similar to RFC 5411.

So we would like to ask feedback from the group on the approach.

We are considering the following options:

(1) Maintain the same style as RFC5411, including SIP. This would mean copy & paste from RFC 5411, or even start with RFC 5411 and expand it. The draft would become RFC5411bis.

(2) Start completely from scratch, and use a different format from RFC 5411. The new guide could be "textbook style", giving a prosaic description of SDP, its different components and working areas, and in the process references to the related RFCs. Notice that this is distinctively different from RFC 5411, as the new document will not be a categorised list of SDP related RFCs with short descriptions.

(3) Reference RFC 5411, and include only new descriptions. This would keep the document concise, but the reader has to read both the new draft and RFC 5411 to get the complete picture. The advantage is, that we could focus on what was done after RFC 5411, giving an insight in the latest developments.
 
(4) Reconsider the scope of the document, i.e. inclusion of SIP or not.

What would be the groups preference?

Best regards,
Bert