Re: [AVT] Submitted draft-hellstrom-avt-rfc2793bis-01.txt
Colin Perkins <csp@csperkins.org> Tue, 30 September 2003 12:13 UTC
Received: from optimus.ietf.org (ietf.org [132.151.1.19] (may be forged)) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id IAA18344 for <avt-archive@odin.ietf.org>; Tue, 30 Sep 2003 08:13:33 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1A4JNO-0002dT-CX for avt-archive@odin.ietf.org; Tue, 30 Sep 2003 08:13:10 -0400
Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id h8UCDACH010089 for avt-archive@odin.ietf.org; Tue, 30 Sep 2003 08:13:10 -0400
Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1A4JNE-0002bE-Nv; Tue, 30 Sep 2003 08:13:00 -0400
Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1A4JMu-0002av-Eo for avt@optimus.ietf.org; Tue, 30 Sep 2003 08:12:40 -0400
Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id IAA18322 for <avt@ietf.org>; Tue, 30 Sep 2003 08:12:33 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1A4JMt-0005tJ-00 for avt@ietf.org; Tue, 30 Sep 2003 08:12:39 -0400
Received: from dundee.dcs.gla.ac.uk ([130.209.242.163]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1A4JMs-0005so-00 for avt@ietf.org; Tue, 30 Sep 2003 08:12:39 -0400
Received: from bisa ([130.209.247.104]:50354 helo=csperkins.org) by dundee.dcs.gla.ac.uk with asmtp (TLSv1:DES-CBC3-SHA:168) (Exim 4.04) id 1A4JMK-0007yk-00; Tue, 30 Sep 2003 13:12:05 +0100
Date: Tue, 30 Sep 2003 13:12:00 +0100
Subject: Re: [AVT] Submitted draft-hellstrom-avt-rfc2793bis-01.txt
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"; format="flowed"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v552)
Cc: avt@ietf.org
To: "Paul E. Jones" <paulej@packetizer.com>
From: Colin Perkins <csp@csperkins.org>
In-Reply-To: <042501c3814a$5db6f420$0401a8c0@packetizer.org>
Message-Id: <4B52E71D-F33F-11D7-8BFC-000A957FC5F2@csperkins.org>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.552)
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: avt-admin@ietf.org
Errors-To: avt-admin@ietf.org
X-BeenThere: avt@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12
Precedence: bulk
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/avt>, <mailto:avt-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Id: Audio/Video Transport Working Group <avt.ietf.org>
List-Post: <mailto:avt@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:avt-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/avt>, <mailto:avt-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
On Monday, Sep 22, 2003, at 21:44 Europe/London, Paul E. Jones wrote: > I've just submitted draft-hellstrom-avt-rfc2793bis-01.txt for comments. > > This is a document that is necessary for the advancement of the V.ToIP > work > within ITU-T Q11/16, which is currently scheduled for approval in > January > 2004. > > Your input is very much appreciated. The T140block counter is presumably used to determine if a T.140 packet has been lost when a single RTP session switches between text and speech (so, for example, one can tell if a lost packet is the last packet of speech or the first packet of text). The rationale is not clearly explained in Section 3.2. There seem to be cases where the T140block counter can fail to detect a lost packet. For example, consider the scenario where the last packet of text and first packet of speech are lost, during the transition. In this case the RTP sequence number will tell you that two packets were lost, but there doesn't seem to be a way to tell if they were text or speech. Is this an issue? Section 3.5 would benefit from more discussion of the difference between a single RTP session that can switch between speech and text (which has no special synchronisation requirements), and multiple simultaneous RTP sessions, some text and some other media types, which need to be synchronised. There is a fundamental difference between the audio/t140 format - which treats text as a low-rate audio codec - and the text/140 format which treats text as a separate media, and this is not well brought out in the draft. In Section 3.8, it is important to clarify that each packet will have a unique timestamp, but that this is not sufficient to identify packets because text packets have no fixed time duration. The current text could be interpreted to imply that packets have non-unique timestamps. I would recommend that the "text/red" MIME type registration be split into a separate draft, since logically separate from transport of T.140. -- Colin Perkins http://csperkins.org/ _______________________________________________ Audio/Video Transport Working Group avt@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/avt
- [AVT] Submitted draft-hellstrom-avt-rfc2793bis-01… Paul E. Jones
- Re: [AVT] Submitted draft-hellstrom-avt-rfc2793bi… Colin Perkins
- Re: [AVT] Submitted draft-hellstrom-avt-rfc2793bi… Paul E. Jones