Re: New Editor's draft (v20140321)

On 24/03/14 14:43, Jan-Ivar Bruaroey wrote:
> On 3/23/14 3:41 PM, Harald Alvestrand wrote:
>>
>> Just to un-impress you a bit :-) .... this is an attempt to put down a
>> concrete implementation of an understanding some of us reached at
>> discussions at the Berlin IETF, July 2013.
>>
>> The understanding was that there may be times where an app needs to
>> know what the state of the underlying source was, independent of the
>> properties of the tracks it's producing. I'm not sure how real that
>> need is, but we agreed at that time to try to express it in some
>> fashion; this is the first attempt.
>
> OK so it hasn't been discussed here then? I'm happy to discuss: I read
> two questions in your statement, what the need is, and by when is it
> useful to have this information?
>
> Also, I am still impressed. :-) Having a "first attempt" land in the
> spec no doubt makes for easier discussion - if any were to surface here
> - but I trust prudence is now taken to remove it again, if need be,
> based on lack of support, not lack of opposition.

I don't think this specific piece is any different from the rest of the 
things we're as a group defining. We discuss, solutions are drafted, we 
discuss some more, and (hopefully) end up at consensus on what should be 
in the Working Group draft.

>
>> --
>> Surveillance is pervasive. Go Dark.
>
> .: Jan-Ivar :.
>

Received on Tuesday, 25 March 2014 07:15:36 UTC