Re: [AVT] Outstanding issues on the HDREXT draft

[Tom Taylor <tom.taylor at rogers.com>]

Below.

Dave Singer wrote:
> At 22:04  -0500 17/02/08, Tom Taylor wrote:
...
>>
>> So the question we have to resolve here is the degree to which the 
>> IETF wishes to track (in the first instance) and review the 
>> specification of RTP header extensions.
> 
> An absolute hard line on "if you want to register, then you are subject 
> to review" is appropriate, and the intent is that it's in the draft.  I 
> have no trouble adding  "and if your practice is public or likely to 
> encounter other implementations, then you SHOULD register", as well.  
> That's appropriate.
> 
> 
> 
[PTT] This is turning the registration process upside down. IANA registration is 
not a privilege to be paid for so much as a tool for achieving specific 
objectives. There are two objectives in this case: protection of the RTP 
architecture and avoidance of name collision. I suspect protection of the 
architecture by coercing a review of specifications is the more important of the 
two.
_______________________________________________
Audio/Video Transport Working Group
avt at ietf.org
http://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/avt