Re: [RTW] Fwd: [dispatch] Reminder: DISPATCH deadlines for IETF-79 - One week left to notify us of plans to submit

Hi Agree that we are behind scedule for this. I am anyway not convinced that we should bring anything to DISPATCH at this point. IMHO it is better to wait for the outcome of the Oct 6 workshop and based on the results then decide what to bring to DISPATCH. Regards /Ingemar
Message: 2 Date: Thu, 16 Sep 2010 06:31:25 +0200 From: Harald Alvestrand <harald@alvestrand.no> To: rtc-web@alvestrand.no Subject: [RTW] Fwd: [dispatch] Reminder: DISPATCH deadlines for IETF-79 - One week left to notify us of plans to submit proposals Message-ID: <4C919D9D.3060300@alvestrand.no> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"; Format="flowed"
Just found this message about deadlines for getting topics on the agenda in Beijing. We might be somewhat behind schedule for that one.
Harald
-------- Original Message -------- Subject: [dispatch] Reminder: DISPATCH deadlines for IETF-79 - One week left to notify us of plans to submit proposals Date: Mon, 23 Aug 2010 09:06:42 -0500 From: Mary Barnes <mary.ietf.barnes@gmail.com> To: DISPATCH <dispatch@ietf.org> CC: rai@ietf.org, rai-ads@tools.ietf.org
Hi all, Another reminder - the deadline for IETF-79 topics for DISPATCH is next Monday, August 30th (5 pm PST). Thanks, Mary.
On Fri, Aug 13, 2010 at 11:37 AM, Mary Barnes <mary.ietf.barnes@gmail.com <mailto:mary.ietf.barnes@gmail.com>> wrote:
Hi all,
Just a reminder that the first deadline for IETF-79 for the DISPATCH WG topics is two weeks from Monday.
Regards, Mary.
On Thu, Jul 29, 2010 at 10:20 AM, Mary Barnes <mary.ietf.barnes@gmail.com <mailto:mary.ietf.barnes@gmail.com>> wrote:
Hi folks,
The following summarizes the deadlines for topics for DISPATCH for IETF-79:
* August 30, 2010. Cutoff date to notify the chairs/DISPATCH WG of plans to submit a proposal. [Two weeks prior to BoF proposal deadline]
* Sept. 6, 2010. Cutoff for charter proposals for topics. [One week prior to BoF proposal deadline]
* Sept. 20, 2010. Topics that are to be the focus of IETF-79 are announced. [One week before deadline to request WG slots]
* Oct. 18th, 2010. -00 draft deadline.
* Oct. 25th, 2010. Draft deadline.
These deadlines have been published on the DISPATCH WG wiki page: http://trac.tools.ietf.org/wg/dispatch/trac/wiki
Note that these dates are closer to the end of the meeting than those for IETF-78 because there is just over 3 months between the end of IETF-78 and beginning of IETF-79 (versus the 4 months we had between this meeting and Anaheim). Note that registration and WG/Bof scheduling for IETF-79 starts on August 9th: http://www.ietf.org/meeting/cutoff-dates-2010.html#IETF79
DISPATCH sets the first deadline such that it's still possible to request a BoF for topics that may be wider in scope and require broader community review. The deadlines for BoFs are set by the leadership so that there is time to consider BoFs in the scheduling. Also, as Gonzalo noted in a separate email, WGs need to have a draft charter at the time they request a WG slot. Further information on the motivation for the DISPATCH planning model is provided in the wiki.
Regards, Mary DISPATCH WG co-chair

On 09/16/10 13:24, Ingemar Johansson S wrote:
Hi
Agree that we are behind scedule for this. I am anyway not convinced that we should bring anything to DISPATCH at this point. IMHO it is better to wait for the outcome of the Oct 6 workshop and based on the results then decide what to bring to DISPATCH.
OK, I have a call with the committee on Monday; I'll try to get together a a note that we can send to the DISPATCH list as a heads-up. Whether we present at the DISPATCH WG meeting is then up to the chairs. Harald
Regards /Ingemar
Message: 2 Date: Thu, 16 Sep 2010 06:31:25 +0200 From: Harald Alvestrand<harald@alvestrand.no> To: rtc-web@alvestrand.no Subject: [RTW] Fwd: [dispatch] Reminder: DISPATCH deadlines for IETF-79 - One week left to notify us of plans to submit proposals Message-ID:<4C919D9D.3060300@alvestrand.no> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"; Format="flowed"
Just found this message about deadlines for getting topics on the agenda in Beijing. We might be somewhat behind schedule for that one.
Harald
-------- Original Message -------- Subject: [dispatch] Reminder: DISPATCH deadlines for IETF-79 - One week left to notify us of plans to submit proposals Date: Mon, 23 Aug 2010 09:06:42 -0500 From: Mary Barnes<mary.ietf.barnes@gmail.com> To: DISPATCH<dispatch@ietf.org> CC: rai@ietf.org, rai-ads@tools.ietf.org
Hi all, Another reminder - the deadline for IETF-79 topics for DISPATCH is next Monday, August 30th (5 pm PST). Thanks, Mary.
On Fri, Aug 13, 2010 at 11:37 AM, Mary Barnes <mary.ietf.barnes@gmail.com <mailto:mary.ietf.barnes@gmail.com>> wrote:
Hi all,
Just a reminder that the first deadline for IETF-79 for the DISPATCH WG topics is two weeks from Monday.
Regards, Mary.
On Thu, Jul 29, 2010 at 10:20 AM, Mary Barnes <mary.ietf.barnes@gmail.com <mailto:mary.ietf.barnes@gmail.com>> wrote:
Hi folks,
The following summarizes the deadlines for topics for DISPATCH for IETF-79:
* August 30, 2010. Cutoff date to notify the chairs/DISPATCH WG of plans to submit a proposal. [Two weeks prior to BoF proposal deadline]
* Sept. 6, 2010. Cutoff for charter proposals for topics. [One week prior to BoF proposal deadline]
* Sept. 20, 2010. Topics that are to be the focus of IETF-79 are announced. [One week before deadline to request WG slots]
* Oct. 18th, 2010. -00 draft deadline.
* Oct. 25th, 2010. Draft deadline.
These deadlines have been published on the DISPATCH WG wiki page: http://trac.tools.ietf.org/wg/dispatch/trac/wiki
Note that these dates are closer to the end of the meeting than those for IETF-78 because there is just over 3 months between the end of IETF-78 and beginning of IETF-79 (versus the 4 months we had between this meeting and Anaheim). Note that registration and WG/Bof scheduling for IETF-79 starts on August 9th: http://www.ietf.org/meeting/cutoff-dates-2010.html#IETF79
DISPATCH sets the first deadline such that it's still possible to request a BoF for topics that may be wider in scope and require broader community review. The deadlines for BoFs are set by the leadership so that there is time to consider BoFs in the scheduling. Also, as Gonzalo noted in a separate email, WGs need to have a draft charter at the time they request a WG slot. Further information on the motivation for the DISPATCH planning model is provided in the wiki.
Regards, Mary DISPATCH WG co-chair

Guys the draft IETF charter below might be of interest to the potential participants of the workshop. FYI... * * * * ** * * * * **** ** * * * * * * ** * * MALT - Multi-stream Attributes for Lifelike Telepresence COCKTAIL - Communication and Correlation of Key Telepresence Attributes for Interoperable Links MAITAI - Multi-stream Attributes for Improving Telepresence Application Interoperability TEQUILA - Telepresence Encoding of QUalifiers for Interoperable Lifelike Applications MOJITO - Multi-stream Orientation for Joining of Interoperable Telepresence Operations In the context of this WG, the term telepresence is used in a general manner to describe systems that provide high definition, high quality audio/video enabling a "being-there" experience. One example is an immersive telepresence system using specially designed and special purpose rooms with multiple displays permitting life size image reproduction using multiple cameras, encoders, decoders, microphones and loudspeakers. Current telepresence systems are based on open standards such as RTP, SIP, H.264, the H.323 suite, however, they cannot easily interoperate with each other without operator assistance and expensive additional equipment which translates from one vendor to another. A major factor in the inability of telepresence systems to interwork is that there is no standardized way to describe and negotiate the use of the multiple streams of audio and video that comprise the media flows. In addition, there is no standardized way to exchange semantic information about what each media stream represents. The WG will create specifications for SIP-based conferencing systems to enable communication of enough information about each media stream so that each receiving system or bridge system can make reasonable decisions about selecting and rendering media streams. This enables systems to make display choices that optimize the "just like being there" experience. This working group is chartered to specify the information about media streams from one entity to another entity: * Spatial relationships of cameras, displays, microphones, and Speakers - in relation to each other and to likely positions of participants * Specific characteristics such as viewpoint, field of view/capture for camera/microphone/display/speaker - so that senders and middleboxes can understand how best to compose streams for receivers, and the receivers will know the characteristics of its received streams *Usage of the stream, for example whether the stream is presentation, or document camera output * Aspect ratio of cameras and displays * Which sources a receiver wants to receive. For example, it might want the source for the left camera, or might want the source chosen by VAD (Voice Activity Detection). Information between sources and sinks about media stream capabilities will be exchanged. The working group will define the semantics, syntax, and transport mechanism necessary for communicating the necessary information. It will consider whether the existing signaling mechanisms (e. g., SDP) can be extended, or another messaging method should be used. The scope of the work includes describing relatively static relations between entities (participants and devices). It also includes handling more dynamic relationships, such as identifying the audio and video streams for the current speaker. The scope includes both systems that provide a fully immersive experience, and systems that interwork with them and therefore need to understand the same multiple stream semantics. The focus of this work is on multiple audio and video streams. Other media types may be considered, however development of methodologies for them is not within the scope of this work. Interoperation with SIP and related standards for audio and video is required. However, backwards compatibility with existing non-standards compliant telepresence systems is not required. This working group is not currently chartered to work on issues of continuous conference control including: far end camera control, indication of fast frame update for video codecs or other rapid switches, floor control, conference roster. Reuse of existing protocols and backwards compatibility with SIP-compliant audio/video endpoints are important factors for the working group to consider. The work will closely coordinate with the appropriate areas and working groups including OPS Area, AVT, MMUSIC, MEDIACTRL, XCON, and SIPCORE. Milestones Nov 2010 Submit information draft to IESG on use cases and requirements Nov 2011 Submit standards track specification to IESG indicating spatial relationships of screens cameras (including variable field of view and orientation), speakers and microphones; and the "usage" of a stream as defined in the charter. Semantics, language and transport mechanism will be specified. David Singer Multimedia and Software Standards, Apple Inc.
participants (3)
-
David Singer
-
Harald Alvestrand
-
Ingemar Johansson S