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