[MMUSIC] MMUSIC stage and studio requirements I-D ...
lazzaro <lazzaro@eecs.berkeley.edu> Thu, 07 July 2005 20:14 UTC
Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org (ietf-mx [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id QAA20014 for <mmusic-archive@ietf.org>; Thu, 7 Jul 2005 16:14:21 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from megatron.ietf.org ([132.151.6.71]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1DqdCb-0000LW-EG for mmusic-archive@ietf.org; Thu, 07 Jul 2005 16:42:33 -0400
Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=megatron.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1DqcYj-0007vC-Rf; Thu, 07 Jul 2005 16:01:21 -0400
Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1DqcYj-0007v4-0H; Thu, 07 Jul 2005 16:01:21 -0400
Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org (ietf-mx [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id QAA15921; Thu, 7 Jul 2005 16:01:18 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from gateway0.eecs.berkeley.edu ([169.229.60.93]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Dqczv-0006K4-EQ; Thu, 07 Jul 2005 16:29:30 -0400
Received: from [128.32.34.73] (dhcp-34-73.CS.Berkeley.EDU [128.32.34.73]) (authenticated bits=0) by gateway0.EECS.Berkeley.EDU (8.13.4/8.13.3) with ESMTP id j67K1FkX000161 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=RC4-SHA bits=128 verify=NOT); Thu, 7 Jul 2005 13:01:16 -0700 (PDT)
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v730)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"; format="flowed"
Message-Id: <2E2A5716-791F-4C40-9583-13F95C325B3F@eecs.berkeley.edu>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
From: lazzaro <lazzaro@eecs.berkeley.edu>
Date: Thu, 07 Jul 2005 13:01:48 -0700
To: mmusic@ietf.org
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.730)
X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/)
X-Scan-Signature: d0bdc596f8dd1c226c458f0b4df27a88
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Cc: avt@ietf.org
Subject: [MMUSIC] MMUSIC stage and studio requirements I-D ...
X-BeenThere: mmusic@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
List-Id: Multiparty Multimedia Session Control Working Group <mmusic.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mmusic>, <mailto:mmusic-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Post: <mailto:mmusic@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:mmusic-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mmusic>, <mailto:mmusic-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
Sender: mmusic-bounces@ietf.org
Errors-To: mmusic-bounces@ietf.org
X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/)
X-Scan-Signature: 0fa76816851382eb71b0a882ccdc29ac
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Hi everyone, I just sent an new individual I-D submission off to Internet-Drafts, that is targeted to MMUSIC: ---- Requirements for a Stage and Studio Multimedia Framework <draft-lazzaro-mmusic-stage-studio-requirements-00.txt> Abstract Is the IETF multimedia stack appropriate for use in the digital audio equipment found in recording studios and concert halls? To help answer this question, this memo lists the requirements for a session management framework for stage and studio devices. Download URL for an advance copy: http://www.cs.berkeley.edu/~lazzaro/sa/pubs/txt/current-sands.txt ---- Some background may be helpful. RTP MIDI has many potential applications. Many are WAN-oriented, and SIP and RTSP as is will work well for these. The RTP MIDI I-D includes interoperability advice for those apps. The application described in the above abstract -- networking together professional audio equipment in recording studios and concert stages -- is a "networking in the small" problem (the network spans the rooms of a recording studio or concert venue) and has unique requirements. MMUSIC may be the right place to design a framework for session management for this application. Or, maybe not -- maybe a new custom protocol done by an audio-centric standards body is more appropriate, free from our legacy-compatibility constraints. Or, maybe there is room for both types of protocols, as the potential devices span from the very simple (powered by 8-bit micros) to very complex (expensive multiprocessor implementations of mixing consoles). I decided the best way to start the discussion on this topic was to write a list of requirements for the domain as seen by the authors. Thus this I-D. Even if the work of doing the framework is not appropriate for MMUSIC, MMUSIC may be the right place to host the discussion of the requirements for the application. If the WG agrees, then elevating this I-D to WG item would be the way to express this agreement. I won't be in Paris, but if the chairs wish to hold a discussion there, I'd be happy to make up slides to guide their presentation. Finally, AVT'ers should note this is an MMUSIC I-D -- I CC'd this initial posting to both lists, but discussion should occur on MMUSIC. --- John Lazzaro http://www.cs.berkeley.edu/~lazzaro lazzaro [at] cs [dot] berkeley [dot] edu --- _______________________________________________ mmusic mailing list mmusic@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mmusic
- [MMUSIC] MMUSIC stage and studio requirements I-D… lazzaro
- Re: [MMUSIC] MMUSIC stage and studio requirements… Shigeru Aoki
- Re: [MMUSIC] MMUSIC stage and studio requirements… lazzaro
- Re: [MMUSIC] MMUSIC stage and studio requirements… Shigeru Aoki
- Re: [MMUSIC] MMUSIC stage and studio requirements… lazzaro
- Re: [MMUSIC] MMUSIC stage and studio requirements… Colin Perkins
- Re: [MMUSIC] MMUSIC stage and studio requirements… lazzaro