Re: Encrypted Media proposal: Summary of the discussion so far

On Thu, Mar 8, 2012 at 3:37 PM, Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com> wrote:

> We don't need to discuss precise implementation details, but the
> overall properties of the CDMs *are* important, because they'll be
> used in conjunction with this technology.
>

I am confident that the proposal's authors or the community, in progressing
the proposal, will adequately define the properties that are essential to
the architectural elements of the proposal, and will rule out defining
properties that are not essential.


> Your refusal to discuss CDMs, though, will not stop the discussion of CDMs
> by other people, nor will it help convince anyone who has reservations
> about the CDMs to support the proposal.


I'm not attempting to convince anyone of anything. I am attempting to
adequately articulate the technical requirements of commercial video
providers (specifically of Cox, which I believe to be representative of
this market segment) and, where possible, to explain those requirements. If
I can answer any further technical questions about these requirements, I am
more than happy to do so. In some cases, I may be unable to answer certain
questions due to license or business constraints. But I'll respond when I
can and tell you when I can't.



G.