Re: [AVTCORE] Stephen Farrell's No Objection on draft-ietf-avtcore-rtp-circuit-breakers-15: (with COMMENT)

Colin Perkins <csp@csperkins.org> Fri, 10 June 2016 16:14 UTC

Return-Path: <csp@csperkins.org>
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 4F09212D828; Fri, 10 Jun 2016 09:14:44 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -4.2
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.2 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id iD_Se95x4axP; Fri, 10 Jun 2016 09:14:41 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from balrog.mythic-beasts.com (balrog.mythic-beasts.com [IPv6:2a00:1098:0:82:1000:0:2:1]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 149D712D740; Fri, 10 Jun 2016 09:14:41 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [130.209.247.112] (port=55776 helo=mangole.dcs.gla.ac.uk) by balrog.mythic-beasts.com with esmtpsa (TLS1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:256) (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from <csp@csperkins.org>) id 1bBOEy-0007Nk-Lt; Fri, 10 Jun 2016 16:20:57 +0100
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 9.3 \(3124\))
From: Colin Perkins <csp@csperkins.org>
In-Reply-To: <596DD9BA-052E-402F-978D-6F4D6A31ED3D@nostrum.com>
Date: Fri, 10 Jun 2016 16:20:45 +0100
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <21DE1FDC-BEA6-46AE-A755-D3088267D943@csperkins.org>
References: <20160503222644.8260.58780.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> <4C3D57C2-DDCA-4F2A-BF42-B69E03195B67@csperkins.org> <4D284CCC-C343-42DA-A47F-DD7931A05C6D@nostrum.com> <91AD984C-C2FD-4666-ADC0-71A3F0767BDF@csperkins.org> <596DD9BA-052E-402F-978D-6F4D6A31ED3D@nostrum.com>
To: Ben Campbell <ben@nostrum.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3124)
X-BlackCat-Spam-Score: -28
X-Mythic-Debug: Threshold = On =
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/avt/VKk8lCqCwTTppPpKBnTzIDQ9Hg0>
Cc: avtcore-chairs@ietf.org, Magnus Westerlund <magnus.westerlund@ericsson.com>, draft-ietf-avtcore-rtp-circuit-breakers@ietf.org, avt@ietf.org, The IESG <iesg@ietf.org>, Stephen Farrell <stephen.farrell@cs.tcd.ie>
Subject: Re: [AVTCORE] Stephen Farrell's No Objection on draft-ietf-avtcore-rtp-circuit-breakers-15: (with COMMENT)
X-BeenThere: avt@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17
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: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/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: Fri, 10 Jun 2016 16:14:44 -0000

> On 10 May 2016, at 17:36, Ben Campbell <ben@nostrum.com> wrote:
> 
> 
> 
> On 10 May 2016, at 11:41, Colin Perkins wrote:
> 
> the text.
>>> 
>>> How about restating it to describe the consequences if a parallel congestion control allows packet loss rates to exceed the threshold?
>> 
>> “To avoid triggering the RTP circuit breaker, any standards-track congestion control algorithms defined for RTP will need to operate within the envelope set by the RTP circuit breaker algorithms”?
>> 
>> Or “…will need to keep packet loss rates within the envelope permitted by the RTP circuit breaker algorithm”?
> 
> I am okay with either, with a slight preference towards the first.

Okay, will incorporate.

-- 
Colin Perkins
https://csperkins.org/