Re: [midcom] Re: Status of TURN

What you say Christian is technically absolutely correct.

However this communities appetite for implementing and labelling their
products with even -00 draft material suggests to me that many implementers
(and probably their customers) are not bothered by these subtleties of IETF
process.

Certainly it would help to know whether informational or proposed standard
is
being sought for this draft.

Pete.

=============================================
Pete Cordell
+44 1473 635863
=============================================

----- Original Message -----
From: "Christian Huitema" <[email protected]>
To: "Pete Cordell" <[email protected]>; "Melinda Shore"
<[email protected]>
Cc: "Jonathan Rosenberg" <[email protected]>; "Peterson, Jon"
<[email protected]>; "Mmusic" <[email protected]>; <[email protected]>
Sent: 20 October 2003 20:27
Subject: RE: [midcom] Re: [MMUSIC] Status of TURN


Individual submissions are a well established part of the process, and
should be considered a fine way to make progress when a working group
would not. There is a catch, however. Individual contributions are very
seldom published as proposed standards -- they normally end up as either
experimental or informational. The criteria for publishing something as
informational ought to be, demonstration of at least some significant
interest in the community -- but not necessarily demonstration of
consensus. The bar for refusing publication in the presence of enough
interest has to be somewhat high -- basically, the group has to be
convinced that implementing the proposal as is would damage the
Internet.

Obviously, publication as a proposed standard would require the
equivalent of WG consensus. I don't believe there is such consensus on
TURN.

-- Christian Huitema

_______________________________________________
mmusic mailing list
[email protected]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mmusic