Re: CELP (was RE:)

[Pekka Nikander <pekka.nikander@nomadiclab.com>]

Dave,

> mb> The problem that has already been discussed in the list is that 
> the timeout
> mb> varies depending on the application.
>
> This is a good example of the reason this topic is part IP-level and
> part Transport-level. I've come to believe that it should be modeled as
> a new, full-fledged architectural layer, taking some from IP and some
> from IP and adding some new stuff.

I fully agree with you here.  As you wrote, this also means that
we will need quite a lot of interaction between various areas
at the IETF.  And probably lots of experimentation as well.

> At any rate, here again I think we can win with a simplied model
> initially, for easier early adoption.  Then it can be enhanced.
>
> (... I'm only
> suggesting a divide-and-conquor approach towards dealing with this
> domain, where we defer whatever complexities we can, to gain early
> utility. Then we can feed that experience into a later round of
> enhancement.)

This is a good approach, IMHO.

(I am sorry but I really can't disagree with you at this level.
However, I do see a number of potential problem areas as soon
as one tries to dive into the details...)

--Pekka