Re: [AVT] I-D ACTION:draft-ietf-avt-rtp-atrac-family-04.txt

[Colin Perkins <csp at csperkins.org>]

Hi,

On 7 Sep 2005, at 16:39, Magnus Westerlund wrote:
> Colin Perkins wrote:
> >  - I notice that the "Intended usage" part of the MIME  
> > registration has
> >    changed from "LIMITED USE" to "COMMON", yet the draft still  
> > indicates
> >    that an ATRAC license is required. This would seem to imply  
> > "LIMITED
> >    USE" would be appropriate.
> I tried to find the definition of these values, but couldn't find  
> it. Anyone having a reference?

As far as I can tell, RFC 2048.

> Despite I have another view on the modifiers provided in the  
> Intended usage field. I think that any media type that is  
> standardized is intended for common usage, despite the fact that  
> you need to license the codec for it. I got the impression that  
> "LIMITED USE" is really for experimental format etc. Which I don't  
> see that we can classify ATRAC as.

There are standards track formats marked as "LIMITED USE" (e.g. RFC  
3862), as well as informational formats (e.g. RFC 3823). The  
definitions aren't clear though, so this might be something to raise  
during the media-types review.

Colin

_______________________________________________
Audio/Video Transport Working Group
avt at ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/avt