Re: Last Call: <draft-thornburgh-adobe-rtmfp-07.txt> (Adobe's Secure Real-Time Media Flow Protocol) to Informational RFC

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



At 09:12 28-05-2013, The IESG wrote:
The IESG has received a request from an individual submitter to consider
the following document:
- 'Adobe's Secure Real-Time Media Flow Protocol'
  <draft-thornburgh-adobe-rtmfp-07.txt> as Informational RFC

The IESG plans to make a decision in the next few weeks, and solicits
final comments on this action. Please send substantive comments to the
ietf@xxxxxxxx mailing lists by 2013-06-25. Exceptionally, comments may be

The write-up mentions that:

  "As a private protocol, no technical changes were performed on the
   protocol itself, but the authors disclosed more details in
   response to the WG discussions."

I don't see why this specification requires IETF consensus as it is not possible to suggest any major changes. The explanation given for the intended status is that the aspects of the protocol protected by IPR were not reviewed externally.

The summary is that there is a memo which is not a WG memo, which is supposed to have gained WG consensus, where some group is supposed to consider the IPR disclosure, and which is being Last-Called as an Individual Submission. I would like to be considered as not part of the consensus.

Nits:

  "At the time of writing, the Adobe Flash Player runtime is
   installed on more than one billion end-user desktop computers."

Shouldn't the memo be about the protocol?

Regards,
-sm




[Index of Archives]     [IETF Annoucements]     [IETF]     [IP Storage]     [Yosemite News]     [Linux SCTP]     [Linux Newbies]     [Fedora Users]