Subject: [MMUSIC] RTSP - draft liaison statement from mmusic to other groups

From: "Jean-Francois Mule" <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 4 Dec 2007 08:58:49 -0700

The text below is a draft liaison statement from mmusic to various organizations working on RTSP extensions.  This is to inform them of the on-going work on RTSP 2.0 in IETF and to ask them to bring their work to IETF MMUSIC.  It was requested by Dave Oran at the last IETF.

   Let Joerg and myself know if you have any comments (in particular, any other groups to be added).

Thanks,
Jean-Francois.
---

   The list of targeted SDOs and other industry groups includes:
	ITU-T
	ATIS
	3GPP SA and SA4
	DVB IP (Phase 2)
	ISMA (Internet Streaming Media Alliance, www.isma.tv)
	ETSI TISPAN IPTV
	Open Mobile Alliance (OMA) BCAST WG
	Open IPTV Forum

Liaison Statement

Submission 
   Date:	shortly after end of IETF#70 

From:       Jörg Ott (IETF MMUSIC WG Co-Chair, [email-masked])
		Jean-François Mulé (IETF MMUSIC WG Co-Chair, [email-masked])

Liaison to 
		  TBD (see above)
	
To:           TBD

CC:           The IETF Liaison Manager for the SDO (https://datatracker.ietf.org/liaison/managers/)
		  Cullen Jennings (RAI Area Director, [email-masked])
		  Jon Peterson (RAI Area Director, [email-masked])
              MMUSIC mailing list ([email-masked])

Re:           On-going work on RTSP version 2.0 and RTSP extensions

Response  
    Contact:  Jean-François Mulé

Technical 
    Contact:  Jean-François Mulé

Purpose:      For information and action

Deadline:     March 7 2008

     We would like to inform you of the on-going work on version 2.0
     of the Real Time Streaming Protocol (RTSP) in the IETF MMUSIC 
     working group. RTSP 2.0 is intended to obsolete and replace 
     RTSP 1.0 and we plan to freeze any protocol feature changes by
     August 1st 2008 to complete RTSP 2.0 by the end of 2008.
     The latest Internet-Draft can be found at:
     http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-mmusic-rfc2326bis

     We would like to request that any RTSP extensions that may be 
     in the scope of RTSP 2.0 be discussed in IETF MMUSIC to seek wider 
     community reviews and expert comments.  We would appreciate if you
     let us know if any group within your organization is working on
     technical specifications that make use of RTSP and if any
     protocol extensions are being considered.  In the case extensions
     are being worked on, we would appreciate if you could provide
     any details (requirements, mechanisms, draft solution, etc.).

     Sincerely,

        Jörg Ott
        Jean-François Mulé

_______________________________________________
mmusic mailing list
[email-masked]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mmusic

---

From: Sean Sheedy <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 04 Dec 2007 09:07:51 -0800

> 	Open Mobile Alliance (OMA) BCAST WG

You should also include CableLabs, as they have some specifications 
referencing RTSP including extensions in the Edge Resource Manager 
Interface Specification (CM-SP-ERMI-I02-051209).

Sean

-- 
Sean Sheedy                                         [email-masked]
(503) 531-6427

---

From: "Jean-Francois Mule" <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 4 Dec 2007 13:02:54 -0700

Good point, I should include this one too formerly on the list. Will
do.
 
Jean-Francois.

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Sean Sheedy [mailto:[email-masked]]
> Sent: Tuesday, December 04, 2007 10:08 AM
> To: [email-masked]
> Subject: Re: [MMUSIC] RTSP - draft liaison statement from mmusic to
> othergroups
>

---

From: Lars Eggert <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 13 Dec 2007 16:56:43 +0200

On 2007-12-4, at 17:58, ext Jean-Francois Mule wrote:
>     community reviews and expert comments.

You might want to specifically refer to RFC 4775 ("Procedures for  
Protocol Extensions and Variations") here. We used something like this  
in a recent liaison statement:

The recently-published RFC 4775 [1] on "Procedures for Protocol  
Extensions and Variations" defines guideline procedures for  
cooperation between the IETF and outside entities on the extension of  
IETF protocols. It attempts to ensure that extensions will conform to  
the applicable architectural principles and technical criteria. Any  
development of protocol extensions and mechanisms related to <X> would  
clearly need to occur under the guidelines of RFC 4775.

>  We would appreciate if you

Lars