Requirements for Internet Media Guides (IMGs)
Note: This ballot was opened for revision 08 and is now closed.
(Jon Peterson) Yes
(Harald Alvestrand) No Objection
Comment (2005-01-20 for -** No value found for 'p.get_dochistory.rev' **)
Reviewed by Spencer Dawkins, Gen-ART He has a number of comments (copied to document log), but none that I see as warranting blocking the document for that reason alone.
(Margaret Cullen) No Objection
(Ted Hardie) (was Discuss) No Objection
I'm concerned that the potential roles of intermediaries are under-specified here. In the introduction, the document says: Finally, with many potential senders and receivers, different types of networks, and presumably numerous service providers, IMG metadata may need to be combined, split, filtered, augmented, modified, etc., on their way from the sender(s) to the receiver(s) to provide the ultimate user with a suitable selection of multimedia services according to her preferences, subscriptions, location, context (e.g. devices, access networks), etc. The Security Considerations section does have some mention of the role of intermediaries, e.g. REQ AUT-5: It MUST be possible to separate or combine individually authenticated pieces of IMG metadata (e.g. in an IMG transceiver) but the general mechanisms by which the receiver, sender, and intermediaries interact does not seem to have generated sufficient requirements to ensure that later protocol work will succeed. I've had a short side discussion with Jon on this, and I agree that this could be specified in a separate document, if that's the way the WG wants to tackle things.