Re: [Rmt] MPEG liaison to IETF

[Stephan Wenger <stewe at stewe.org>]

I'm sure this series of workshops MPEG is putting together is an adequate
venue to introduce MPEG to IETF technologies, including to RMT's work.
Whether MPEG would be the right venue to work on such protocols themselves,
would IMHO be subject to discussion (at least).  I believe that this is the
main background of the workshop.
Regards,
Stephan



On 7/9/09 10:11 AM, "Rex Buddenberg" <budden at nps.navy.mil> wrote:

> Stephan,
> 
> The grafting of the TV mentality onto the Internet is a cultural
> collision that has not been clean.  So it's appropriate to discuss
> cleaning up a bit.  One line clipped out of the attachment:
> 
> ?
>      delivery of media over IP-based networks, fitting into traffic
> management, content distribution, and network management, by using or
> living with TCP
> 
> 
> MPEG's letter seems to use the term 'transport' pretty loosely.  But I
> think we can get past that.  Most multicast distribution runs over UDP
> and we all know that 1) that works ... at least some of the time and 2)
> jettisoning the transport layer functionality in order to support
> multicast is a tradeoff that we know there is a better way.  Might this
> be the place to discuss reliable multicast protocols with MPEG?
> 
> 
> 
> On Wed, 2009-07-08 at 09:28 -0700, Stephan Wenger wrote:
>> Hi AVT, MMUSIC, FECFRAME, RMT, and all,
>> 
>> MPEG sent another liaison to the IETF, again with the subject of MPEG
>> possibly becoming engaged in new media transport work.  I have
>> attached a PDF version; the usual ZIP file should show up in the IETF
>> liaison archives shortly.
>> 
>> I have not been in London and, therefore, I¹m unable to provide more
>> insight into the relevance, or seriousness, of this exercise.
>>  However, reading the statement (and between its lines), it appears
>> that at least some folks in MPEG would want to work on topics the IETF
>> would normally be interested in, whereas others are perhaps happy with
>> the current worksplit.  I¹m fairly sure that now would be a good time
>> to clarify the IETF¹s view on standardization territory to MPEG.
>> 
>> MPEG asks for the IETF¹s input by their October meeting, and my
>> suggestion would be that the chairs of the WGs possibly affected (to
>> which this email is addressed) should coordinate and send them a
>> response by that timeframe.
>> 
>> Stephan
>> 
>> 
>> 
>>    
>> _______________________________________________
>> Rmt mailing list
>> Rmt at ietf.org
>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rmt