IETF 79 MMUSIC Minutes MMUSIC met from 1510 to 1610 on Wednesday afternoon, November 10. Flemming Andreasen and Tom Taylor chaired. 51 people attended. 1. Agenda and Status ================= The agenda was accepted without change. The Chairs' presentation is at http://www.ietf.org/proceedings/79/slides/mmusic-0.pdf. Tom Taylor drew attention to the Note Well statement. The change of responsible Area Director for the Working Group was noted. Gonzalo Camarillo , the new Area Director for MMUSIC, indicated that Robert Sparks would continue to handle draft-ietf-mmusic-image-attributes, since he had been the one to review it. Reviewers are needed to verify that draft-ietf-mmusic-sdp-cs-05 is ready for WG Last Call. draft-ietf-mmusic-sdp-media-capabilities-10 needs review to help it move forward. The Chairs are also looking for volunteer editors to move draft-ietf-mmusic-media-path-middleboxes forward and to work on draft-ietf-mmusic-rfc4566bis. The Chairs were advised that MMUSIC will probably need more meeting time and can expect more participants at IETF 80 if the Telepresence work gets moving. 2. The Session Description Protocol (SDP) 'servclass' Attribute ============================================================ draft-polk-mmusic-traffic-class-for-sdp-00.txt Presented by James Polk Charts at http://www.ietf.org/proceedings/79/slides/mmusic-1.ppt The basic problem addressed is to provide administrative control over the amount of network resources allocated to different media streams. The attribute is to be used in declarative fashion. Given this, Chart 5 raises the issue of whether the offeror can request that the same service class should apply in both directions. Roni Even had trouble imagining a case where the two directions of a stream would merit different treatment. Ali Begen proposed an example, but it seemed likely that two different streams would be involved. Looking at the practicalities of the proposal, Christer Holmberg wondered whether an IANA registry would have to be set up for the service class labels and their semantics. Jonathan Lennox remarked that the traffic classes as defined in RFC 4544 may have made sense at the time, but they don't seem to be up to date today. 3. TCP Candidates with Interactive Connectivity Establishment (ICE) ================================================================ draft-ietf-mmusic-ice-tcp-10.txt Presented by Ari Keranen Charts at http://www.ietf.org/proceedings/79/slides/mmusic-2.pdf Gonzalo Camarillo noted that BFCP had been raising related issues on the Dispatch list. Those interested in ICE-TCP were requested to attend the Dispatch meeting to help move that discussion forward. It was noted that Tom Kristensen had raised a few questions on the list. Moving forward, Ari indicated that one more minor update would be coming. The Chairs indicated the need for a review in preparation for Working Group Last Call. Jonathan Lennox volunteered to do the review. 4. Grouping of Adjacent Media in SDP ================================= draft-jennings-mmusic-adjacent-grouping-02.txt Presented by Ali C. Begen Charts at http://www.ietf.org/proceedings/79/slides/mmusic-3.pdf The problem dealt with is the matching of video streams to multiple displays. Roni Even noted that the proposals were decalarative and therefore not relevant to telepresence. The draft does not refer to the telepresence, and the presentation should not have done so, either. Magnus Westerlund would like to see where the telepresence work goes, but was concerned that we not have two solutions to the same problem. Peter Musgrave supported him, but noted the assumption in this draft of a 1:1 relationship between media streams and displays. Christer Holmberg noted other assumptions in the draft, that the WG might want to change. The limited geometry of the proposal was noted. Ingemar Johansson was concerned that any attempt to go beyond this limitation would result in a combinatorial explosion of geometries. Roni Even suggested that the semantics woul;d have to be: "take all or take none". Ali Begen thought this would be up to the application. Roni replied that picking and choosing implies negotiation rather than declaration. Hadriel Kaplan remarked that there are other ways to solve the problem, such as multiple calls. Roni Even agreed. Mary Barnes asked if anyone else supported the work. Why not wait for telepresence? Cullen Jennings replied that there are people who need this capability. The big difference from telepresence would be its declarative nature, in contrast to the negotiation capability intended for telepresence. The Chairs' summary was that the work needed to ripen on the list before it could progress further. 5. RTSP 2.0 draft-ietf-mmusic-rfc2326bis-25 Presented by Magnus Westerlund Charts at http://www.ietf.org/proceedings/79/slides/mmusic-4.pdf The charts presented the most recent changes to the draft. After one further update, the draft will be subjected to a brief final review by the Working Group. The meeting had no comments.