Re: [AVTCORE] [Wish] Video ingest over QUIC

Hi, Alan,

On Mon, Jul 19, 2021 at 11:55 AM Alan Frindell <afrind@fb.com> wrote:

> Kirill and I are scheduled to present this draft at the ART area session
> (combined with DISPATCH) on Monday 7/26 from 12-2 Pacific.  We’ve also been
> approached by the MOPS chairs to present there, though that session
> conflicts with QUIC.
>

We've gotta watch for this conflict ... but

> I also scheduled a side meeting
> <https://trac.ietf.org/trac/ietf/meeting/wiki/111sidemeetings> during
> Thursday Session IV (4:30 – 5:30 Pacific, vide conference details TBD) so
> we can have more time to discuss the general problem space, requirements
> and mailing list/BoF logistics moving forward.
>

Thank you for setting this up. It seems just about right.

Best,

Spencer

> Thanks
>
>
>
> -Alan
>
>
>
> *From: *Martin Duke <martin.h.duke@gmail.com>
> *Date: *Monday, July 19, 2021 at 7:45 AM
> *To: *Lucas Pardue <lucaspardue.24.7@gmail.com>
> *Cc: *Spencer Dawkins at IETF <spencerdawkins.ietf@gmail.com>, Victor
> Vasiliev <vasilvv@google.com>, "avt@ietf.org" <avt@ietf.org>, Roberto
> Peon <fenix@fb.com>, "juberti@alphaexplorationco.com" <
> juberti@alphaexplorationco.com>, "wish@ietf.org" <wish@ietf.org>, Mike
> English <ietf@englishm.net>, Alan Frindell <afrind@fb.com>, QUIC WG <
> quic@ietf.org>, Kirill Pugin <ikir@fb.com>, Luke Curley <
> kixelated@gmail.com>
> *Subject: *Re: [Wish] [AVTCORE] Video ingest over QUIC
>
>
>
> This sounds like a side meeting that might lead to a BoF at 112?
>
>
>
> On Sat, Jul 17, 2021 at 5:18 PM Lucas Pardue <lucaspardue.24.7@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> On Fri, 16 Jul 2021, 19:36 Spencer Dawkins at IETF, <
> spencerdawkins.ietf@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> This is, of course, why ADs get paid the big bucks (ha!), but
>
>
>
> On Wed, Jul 14, 2021 at 12:10 PM Mike English <ietf@englishm.net> wrote:
>
> I would personally be very interested in a "video over QUIC" working group
> or mailing list.
>
>
>
> Martin Thompson said (in a reply that, I think, only went to the QUIC
> mailing list(*)) that he thought this was big enough to BOF (which doesn't
> mean it shouldn't be discussed at DISPATCH at IETF 111), but does say
> something about what a mailing list could be used for. Offhand, I can
> imagine:
>
>    - discussion of the existing
>    https://www.ietf.org/archive/id/draft-kpugin-rush-00.html draft
>    - discussion of potential scope for a BOF proposal
>    - discussion of proposed text for a BOF request
>
> Could I ask what the people who are expressing interest in a mailing list
> are thinking about?
>
>
>
> +1. Good questions.
>
>
>
> There seems to be some appetite for _something_ that doesn't fit in
> existing boxes. Defining exactly what might be would be a sensible step on
> the path to a BoF.
>
>
>
> Cheers,
>
> Lucas
>
>
>
>
>
> Best,
>
>
>
> Spencer
>
>
>
> (*) email is archived at
> https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/quic/ocCm8E-GzP_pn4LBcJyKQeN7GRU/.
>
>
>
> The directness of this draft is perhaps what's most interesting to me.
> In particular, the absence of out-of-band signaling / session
> establishment stands in striking contrast with another UDP-based media
> ingest option: WebRTC.
>
> The signaling needed for session establishment (and the diversity of
> implementations for such signaling) has historically been a barrier for
> WebRTC adoption as an ingest protocol outside of the browser context.
> WISH-WG is working to improve that situation for WebRTC of course, but a
> new QUIC-based ingest protocol presents an opportunity to sidestep some of
> those known-issues by making an architectural decision up front about
> whether that style of session management is necessary in a video
> contribution workflow.
>
> I'm hoping others with more experience on these lists can speak to the
> history and tradeoffs associated with those approaches, but I just wanted
> to call attention to the aspect of the draft that seemed most notable to me
> as an operator of a low latency streaming platform where WebRTC egress and
> ingest capabilities are provided, but where RTMP is still the de facto
> ingest protocol of choice for many users.
>
> Thanks for sharing this work!
> -Mike
>
>
>
> On Wed, Jul 14, 2021 at 12:32 PM Victor Vasiliev <vasilvv=
> 40google.com@dmarc.ietf.org> wrote:
>
> Hi Alan,
>
>
>
> Excited to see this draft!
>
>
>
> Since this isn't technically in scope for either avtcore, wish or quic
> working groups, what would people think about making a new mailing list for
> video over QUIC?
>
>
>
> Cheers,
>
>  Victor.
>
>
>
> On Wed, Jul 14, 2021 at 3:27 AM Justin Uberti <
> juberti@alphaexplorationco.com> wrote:
>
> +1
>
>
>
> On Tue, Jul 13, 2021 at 1:35 PM Roberto Peon <fenix=
> 40fb.com@dmarc.ietf.org> wrote:
>
> Seems like a good idea to me, unless there is a home that is already well
> suited!
>
> -=R
>
>
>
> *From: *QUIC <quic-bounces@ietf.org> on behalf of Luke Curley <
> kixelated@gmail.com>
> *Date: *Tuesday, July 13, 2021 at 1:16 PM
> *To: *Alan Frindell <afrind=40fb.com@dmarc.ietf.org>
> *Cc: *"quic@ietf.org" <quic@ietf.org>, Sergio Garcia Murillo <
> sergio.garcia.murillo@gmail.com>, "avt@ietf.org" <avt@ietf.org>, "
> wish@ietf.org" <wish@ietf.org>, Kirill Pugin <ikir@fb.com>
> *Subject: *Re: [Wish] Video ingest over QUIC
>
>
>
> Hey Alan, thanks for publishing your protocol!
>
>
>
> Twitch has also been working on a video over QUIC protocol, albeit
> primarily for video distribution instead of contribution. We're very
> interested in collaborating on RUSH and producing a new standard for live
> streaming! Would there be broader interest in forming a video over QUIC
> working group?
>
>
>
> On Tue, Jul 13, 2021 at 12:04 PM Alan Frindell <afrind=
> 40fb.com@dmarc.ietf.org> wrote:
>
> Hi Sergio, thanks for your interest in the draft.
>
>
>
> I’m interested in seeing a video ingest protocol standard that leverages
> QUIC as a transport, has some partial reliability support, and is less
> connection-oriented so that servers can go down for maintenance without
> impacting ingest reliability or having arbitrarily long drain times.  We
> published our RUSH draft to help kickstart the conversation but we’re open
> to feedback and modifications if they help advance those goals.
>
>
>
> Thanks
>
>
>
> -Alan
>
>
>
> *From: *Sergio Garcia Murillo <sergio.garcia.murillo@gmail.com>
> *Date: *Tuesday, July 13, 2021 at 9:02 AM
> *To: *Alan Frindell <afrind@fb.com>
> *Cc: *"quic@ietf.org" <quic@ietf.org>, "wish@ietf.org" <wish@ietf.org>, "
> avt@ietf.org" <avt@ietf.org>, Kirill Pugin <ikir@fb.com>
> *Subject: *Re: [Wish] Video ingest over QUIC
>
>
>
> Hi Alan,
>
>
>
> I think that the correct place for discussing it is AVTCORE as Bernard has
> indicated, as  WISH is not chartered to implement any new media protocol.
>
>
>
> The draft is very interesting and I would be willing to collaborate, what
> is your main interest? Do you want to try to publish it as it is or would
> you be accepting feedback and include modifications?
>
>
>
> Best regards
>
> Sergio
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> El mar, 13 jul 2021 a las 17:37, Alan Frindell (<afrind=
> 40fb.com@dmarc.ietf.org>) escribió:
>
> Hi, for several years, Facebook has been using its own video ingest
> protocol over QUIC from our apps to our infra.  While we’ve spoken about it
> before, we just now published a draft documenting how it works:
> https://www.ietf.org/archive/id/draft-kpugin-rush-00.html.
>
> The protocol leverages the advantages of QUIC transport, and features a
> partially reliable mode using only QUIC v1 RST_STREAM.
>
> We welcome your feedback
>
> Thanks
>
> -Alan Frindell
>
>
>
>
>
> --
> Wish mailing list
> Wish@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/wish
>
> --
> Wish mailing list
> Wish@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/wish
>
> _______________________________________________
> Audio/Video Transport Core Maintenance
> avt@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/avt
>
> --
> Wish mailing list
> Wish@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/wish
>
>