similar to: I-D ACTION:draft-herlein-avt-rtp-speex-00.txt (fwd)

Alfred E. Heggestad wrote: > <...> > > If we don't get any comments in 1 week (by 22. May 2007) we will go ahead > and submit it to the IETF. Of course you can comment on it also after it > has been submitted, but we would like to get the input from the Speex > community first.. > thanks for all the input. please find attached an updated version of the draft. I

Hi Please find an updated version of the Speex I-D attached. The only change is addition of the copyright conditions in Appendix A, as requested by Ivo. Many thanks for your input. I will give you a few more days before submitting to AVT working group /alfred Ivo Emanuel Gon?alves wrote: > Do not forget to add the "Copying conditions" to the RFC. > > Check

Hi all, Please find below the -01 update to draft-herlein-speex-rtp-profile, as submitted to the IETF. Regards Phil <p>-------------------8<-----------------------------------8<--------------------- <p><p>Internet Engineering Task Force Greg Herlein Internet Draft Jean-Marc Valin

Looks good to me. Jean-Marc Alfred E. Heggestad a ?crit : > Hi > > Please find an updated version of the Speex I-D attached. The only > change is addition of the copyright conditions in Appendix A, > as requested by Ivo. > > Many thanks for your input. > > I will give you a few more days before submitting to AVT working group > > > /alfred > > Ivo

Hi all We are about to send an updated version of the internet draft "RTP Payload Format for the Speex Codec" to the IETF AVT working group. Before submitting we would like your input, if you have any comments or input please send them to the mailing list. If we don't get any comments in 1 week (by 22. May 2007) we will go ahead and submit it to the IETF. Of course you can comment

FYI, -------------- next part -------------- An embedded message was scrubbed... From: Colin Perkins <csp at csperkins.org> Subject: Working group last call: draft-ietf-avt-rtp-speex-05.txt Date: Mon, 31 Mar 2008 22:25:03 +0100 Size: 2054 Url: http://lists.xiph.org/pipermail/speex-dev/attachments/20080331/289739db/attachment.eml

Here my comments: Page 3: To be compliant with this specification, implementations MUST support 8 kHz sampling rate (narrowband)" and SHOULD support 8 kbps bitrate. The sampling rate MUST be 8, 16 or 32 kHz. There is a type above after (narrowband), there is a " extra character. I don't understand what is the motivation to specify "SHOULD support 8 kbps

On Fri, 27 Feb 2009, Jean-Marc Valin wrote: > Hi Aymeric, > > Yes, I'm receiving the emails but haven't had enough time to look into > the details yet. I've seen you responded to many comments, so what are > the ones for which we still need to respond? Summary is there: https://datatracker.ietf.org/idtracker/ballot/2837/ As I understand: we need to change

Hello, What's the purpose of the 'sr' sdp parameter ? The sample rate is already given in the a=rtpmap line ? Simon Le dim 29/06/2003 à 12:12, philkerr@elec.gla.ac.uk a écrit : > Hi all, > > Please find below an updated Speex Internet Draft document. > > It would be good if we could book some time for discussion on Speex at the IETF > meeting in Vienna (scheduled

All: My presentation to the IETF on the proposed Speex payload format did not occur. Details below. Progress continues, though, towards getting the Speex payload format approved. Greg ---------- Forwarded message ---------- Date: Fri, 21 Mar 2003 08:58:23 -0800 (PST) From: Stephen Casner <casner@acm.org> To: Greg Herlein <gherlein@herlein.com> Cc: avt@ietf.org Subject: Re: [AVT]

Hi Jean-Marc, Alfred and Greg, Are you receiving the mails from IETF about draft-ietf-avt-rtp-speex The mails are not coming from AVT mailing list, but I think we are all 3 part of a minimal list (draft-ietf-avt-rtp-speex at tools.ietf.org) dedicated to latest discussion about the draft. I have answered some questions, but there are small changes and adaptation still required to the ietf

On 6/1/07, Jean-Marc Valin <jean-marc.valin@usherbrooke.ca> wrote: > No, keep as is. It is definitely not public domain, since it's > BSD-licensed and "patent-free" will open futile and unnecessary > discussions (on what it's supposed to mean) at the IETF. I was under the impression that Speex, like Vorbis and FLAC had its specification under the PD, and only the

On 5/31/07, Alfred E. Heggestad <aeh@db.org> wrote: > Could you let me know where to insert this statement in the xml > document? I'm no expert, but I recommend adding it in the Full Copyright Statement section. More or less like this: Copyright (C) The IETF Trust (2007). This document is subject to the rights, licenses and restrictions contained in BCP 78, and except as

Ivo Emanuel Gon?alves a ?crit : > Also, another correction that you may want to do: > > Over the Introduction section, Speex is described as "Free > software/open-source". I believe this should be replaced altogether > with "Patent-free and royalty-free. Specification under the Public > Domain." No, keep as is. It is definitely not public domain, since

On Wed, 16 May 2007, Jean-Marc Valin wrote: >>> The main idea is that Speex supports many bit-rates, but for one reason >>> or another, some modes may be left out in implementations (e.g. for RAM >>> or network reasons). What we're saying here is that you should make an >>> effoft to at least support (and offer) the 8 kbps mode to maximise >>>

Ivo Emanuel Gon?alves wrote: > Do not forget to add the "Copying conditions" to the RFC. > > Check http://wiki.debian.org/NonFreeIETFDocuments > I would be happy to add this statement. Could you let me know where to insert this statement in the xml document? I am using xml2rfc to generate the draft. Or alternatively point to other documents (.xml sources) that have the

> I was under the impression that Speex, like Vorbis and FLAC had its > specification under the PD, AFAIK, under US law, the only way for something to fall in the public domain is for either 1) the author to be an employee of the US government or 2) the author to be dead for more than X years (X being larger than the age of Mickey Mouse). To the best of my knowledge (did I miss

Hi, some good news from IETF :) /alfred -------------- next part -------------- An embedded message was scrubbed... From: The IESG <iesg-secretary at ietf.org> Subject: [AVT] Protocol Action: 'RTP Payload Format for the Speex Codec' to Proposed Standard Date: Mon, 18 May 2009 06:26:11 -0700 (PDT) Size: 3867 Url:

comment inline. On Wed, 16 May 2007, Jean-Marc Valin wrote: >> Page 3: >> >> To be compliant with this specification, implementations MUST support >> 8 kHz sampling rate (narrowband)" and SHOULD support 8 kbps bitrate. >> The sampling rate MUST be 8, 16 or 32 kHz. >> >> There is a type above after (narrowband), there is a " extra

> http://www.herlein.com/downloads/speex/docs/draft-herlein-speex-rtp-profile-02.txt FYI to all: The AVT chairs requested a file name change, which I complied with. It's been submitted to the IETF and when it is accepted and posted there I will forward the announcement. I've also re-confirmed that there is ample precedent for such a payload format to get approved as an RFC