[AVTCORE] AVTcore IETF86 minutes

"Roni Even" <ron.even.tlv@gmail.com> Tue, 02 April 2013 09:29 UTC

Return-Path: <ron.even.tlv@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: avt@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: avt@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1BD9B21F982B for <avt@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 2 Apr 2013 02:29:24 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -0.396
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.396 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-1.067, BAYES_00=-2.599, DOS_OUTLOOK_TO_MX=1, DYN_RDNS_SHORT_HELO_HTML=0.499, FH_HOST_EQ_D_D_D_D=0.765, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_PBL=0.905, RDNS_DYNAMIC=0.1]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id jACRP3nN53+T for <avt@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 2 Apr 2013 02:29:14 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-ea0-x22b.google.com (mail-ea0-x22b.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4013:c01::22b]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 87ED521F9829 for <avt@ietf.org>; Tue, 2 Apr 2013 02:29:13 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-ea0-f171.google.com with SMTP id b15so109179eae.2 for <avt@ietf.org>; Tue, 02 Apr 2013 02:29:12 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=x-received:from:to:subject:date:message-id:mime-version :content-type:x-mailer:thread-index:content-language; bh=mNGgPQ7ums8CUjRyLqJdsSsF8/8SUnE0B+tjzv/FE3s=; b=l52roECcNb2JMH3WDP4ZW4ByMW5+i2qeoJKoqzrEFgKagqlYsFBqaWQ0B/tlI1j0qM XEoyVCEGEKtCAa6bc9xtKSpqvNdGTPpBxTL/vNpAVdD222lqoJE99kOelp1vQExu9k5Y 6JcmsFMDQkRz5r9gqG9mNs8EPXivNXdDi0I55hmdi1Jnlc9zkW0vncszTNuaOtDbJP3e Tlbv4bIGFXz6yqKYEZLEblu6ccYDkYV8Bh0reYt6A0QJEkbA73uq3RwD36lgNV3nbMkg BvXfUhY2W60i3W+fowlyOd+N61xS6uydJ/5haY8OrEAPJjwPuV1ceYvKpA5Aibsd1YLK kqxA==
X-Received: by 10.14.218.71 with SMTP id j47mr46833630eep.28.1364894952239; Tue, 02 Apr 2013 02:29:12 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from RoniE (bzq-79-181-177-28.red.bezeqint.net. [79.181.177.28]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id bc1sm1328440eeb.11.2013.04.02.02.29.08 (version=TLSv1 cipher=RC4-SHA bits=128/128); Tue, 02 Apr 2013 02:29:11 -0700 (PDT)
From: "Roni Even" <ron.even.tlv@gmail.com>
To: <avt@ietf.org>
Date: Tue, 2 Apr 2013 12:28:44 +0300
Message-ID: <06b701ce2f84$7ba91470$72fb3d50$@gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_06B8_01CE2F9D.A0F7AC00"
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 14.0
thread-index: Ac4vhFVFc4b38pm2Tziw1afDGGvt8Q==
Content-Language: en-us
Subject: [AVTCORE] AVTcore IETF86 minutes
X-BeenThere: avt@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: Audio/Video Transport Core Maintenance <avt.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/avt>, <mailto:avt-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/avt>
List-Post: <mailto:avt@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:avt-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/avt>, <mailto:avt-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 02 Apr 2013 09:29:24 -0000

Hi,

Here are the minutes of the AVTcore session. Please review 

Magnus and Roni

 

 

 

Audio/Video Transport Core Maintenance  (AVTCore) Working Group meeting
notes

===============================================================

 

CHAIRS:  Magnus Westerlund       magnus.westerlund@ericsson.com

                Roni Even         roni.even@mail01.huawei.com

 

Notes taker: Paul Kyzivat

Jabber Scribe: Jonathan Lennox

 

Tuesday, 12 March 2013 

AVTCore Status Update - chairs                  

The slides are in
http://www.ietf.org/proceedings/86/slides/slides-86-avtcore-0.pdf.

Draft-ietf-avt-srtp-not-mandatory-12 is still in IESG processing it is
waiting for progress of draft-ietf-avtcore-rtp-security-options-02 which
reviews the different RTP security options, the security options draft need
reviews by security experts as well as others since it gives guidance for
developers on how to choose the appropriate security mechanism.

draft-ietf-avtcore-aria-srtp-01 is ready for WGLC but need more SRTP
security expert review.

The authors of draft-ietf-avtcore-srtp-aes-gcm-05 added a section on RTP
header extension encryption and the document needs a second WGLC before
going to publication.

We are waiting for an update of draft-ietf-avtcore-srtp-ekt-00 and we can
probably start a WGLC when it is submitted.

draft-ietf-avtcore-6222bis-00 need an update and will be ready for WGLC.
Update was submitted during the meeting and WGLC started after the meeting.

draft-ietf-avtcore-avp-codecs-00 need an update and will be ready for WGLC.
Update was submitted during the meeting and WGLC started after the meeting.

draft-ietf-avtcore-multi-media-rtp-session-02 had some open issues mostly on
multi-streams and not on multi media types. The view in the meeting after
discussing draft-lennox-avtcore-rtp-multi-stream-02 is that multi-streams
topic will be part of the Lennox draft so a revision of
multi-media-rtp-session is needed.

draft-ietf-avtcore-idms-09 will go to publication. Publication request was
sent after the meeting.

 

 

draft-westerlund-avtcore-multiplex-architecture-03 is an informational
document. There was support in the meeting to have it as a WG document. Will
verify on the list 

There was support to have draft-westerlund-avtcore-rtp-topologies-update-02
as a WG document and it will be verified on the list.

RTP Considerations for Endpoints sending multiple media streams in
draft-lennox-avtcore-rtp-multi-stream-02 was presented by Jonathan Lennox. 

The slides are in
http://www.ietf.org/proceedings/86/slides/slides-86-avtcore-4.pdf. 

The draft addresses the issue with supporting multiple sources in an RTP
session since current solution will usually support only one source per RTP
session. The draft re-visits RFC 3550 to clarify behavior for multi-source
endpoints and suggests that there may be a need to update RFC 3550 to change
some RTCP timing rules.  It proposes recommendations on optimizations for
reception reports. 

This revision incorporates
draft-wu-avtcore-multiplex-multisource-endpoint-01 and has new solution
based on meeting between the authors of both drafts at IETF85.

There were no issues with the author's proposals for how deal with the open
issues. 

On the way forward there was some discussion about the content of this draft
and draft-ietf-avtcore-multi-media-rtp-session-02. There was support to have
this document as a WG document and it will be verified on the list.

It seems like the draft will include clarifications of rtcp size and timing
that are now in draft-ietf-avtcore-multi-media-rtp-session-02.

 

RTP Congestion Control: Circuit Breakers for Unicast Sessions in
draft-ietf-avtcore-rtp-circuit-breakers-02 presented by Colin Perkins.

The slides are in
http://www.ietf.org/proceedings/86/slides/slides-86-avtcore-1.pdf  

 

RTP circuit breakers provide an envelope within which congestion control can
operate. Circuit breakers are conditions under which an RTP sender needs to
stop transmitting media data to protect the network from excessive
congestion. Colin presented the changes in this revision

There was a comment from Jonathan Lennox that the draft need to take into
account the reporting groups if they will be accepted as a solution and not
only reduced size RTCP.

Colin says he has no open issues.

There are some experimental implementations that will be presented at the
next meeting. There was a request for help with implementation experience.

      

RTP Clock Source Signalling presented by Kevin Gross

The slides are in
http://www.ietf.org/proceedings/86/slides/slides-86-avtcore-2.pdf.

The draft proposes a solution to explicitly signal clock information in RTP
including timestamp reference clock and media clock. 

Magnus Westerlund and Bo Burman volunteered to review the O/A portion of the
document. The document is ready for WGLC.

 

RTP and Leap Second presented by Kevin Gross

The slides are in
http://www.ietf.org/proceedings/86/slides/slides-86-avtcore-3.pdf.

This document discusses issues that arise when RTP sessions span Universal
Coordinate Time (UTC) leap seconds.  It updates RFC 3550 to describe how RTP
senders and receivers should behave in the presence of leap seconds.

Colin Perkins wondered if sending sender report would be better than
reception report. Kevin Gross thought that might confuse some devices. Colin
replied "maybe". Jonathan Lennox said even if you don't send anything during
the event, could you still have a problem. Conclusion that this is a problem
only if the two sides disagree whether there is a leap second.

The draft is ready for WGLC but it will be after the clock source signaling
draft.