IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [AVTCORE] [MMUSIC] Comment ondraft-westerlund-avtcore-multistream-and-simulcast

"Ali C. Begen (abegen)" <abegen@cisco.com> Wed, 20 July 2011 14:44 UTC

Return-Path: <abegen@cisco.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 AD6FC21F8777; Wed, 20 Jul 2011 07:44:59 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -5.266
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.266 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-2.667, BAYES_00=-2.599]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id j81yzqnSAHw7; Wed, 20 Jul 2011 07:44:56 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from rcdn-iport-6.cisco.com (rcdn-iport-6.cisco.com [173.37.86.77]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A3CEB21F86D7; Wed, 20 Jul 2011 07:44:55 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=abegen@cisco.com; l=1077; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1311173095; x=1312382695; h=mime-version:content-transfer-encoding:subject:date: message-id:in-reply-to:references:from:to; bh=Szw8D/gPJd5z6/GcWqtPdutyLROmod2ZsmhfIg4rDc8=; b=jO7DZkI0dQ+RVRAo0VWfRZAOe1/KzvskzalutJK9tcfpGvCsHyqPimL4 4Gj3olXKM4spMR9AuXxqOUvQDAYnqui5wli01jNfF6sqlyt3pDuIccZmu KodNHFE1Vg2fXCH1DwLEkKf1TfGpGH5NgGpCajYA3AI4Kh4y18BEVltON w=;
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: At8AAFjpJk6rRDoG/2dsb2JhbABTmBiPS3eIfKFgni6FXl8Eh1WQKYtt
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.67,235,1309737600"; d="scan'208";a="4743843"
Received: from mtv-core-1.cisco.com ([171.68.58.6]) by rcdn-iport-6.cisco.com with ESMTP; 20 Jul 2011 14:44:55 +0000
Received: from xbh-sjc-211.amer.cisco.com (xbh-sjc-211.cisco.com [171.70.151.144]) by mtv-core-1.cisco.com (8.14.3/8.14.3) with ESMTP id p6KEiriP008425; Wed, 20 Jul 2011 14:44:54 GMT
Received: from xmb-sjc-215.amer.cisco.com ([171.70.151.169]) by xbh-sjc-211.amer.cisco.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.4675); Wed, 20 Jul 2011 07:44:53 -0700
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5
Content-class: urn:content-classes:message
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="Windows-1252"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Date: Wed, 20 Jul 2011 07:43:47 -0700
Message-ID: <04CAD96D4C5A3D48B1919248A8FE0D540F81022F@xmb-sjc-215.amer.cisco.com>
In-Reply-To: <C7E519BB-5726-42FC-8786-D511C1B5779C@cisco.com>
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
Thread-Topic: [MMUSIC] Comment ondraft-westerlund-avtcore-multistream-and-simulcast
Thread-Index: AcxG6mXqnDbDBtWaTPi+OMmdczGS3AAAOBCg
References: <C7E519BB-5726-42FC-8786-D511C1B5779C@cisco.com>
From: "Ali C. Begen (abegen)" <abegen@cisco.com>
To: "Cullen Jennings (fluffy)" <fluffy@cisco.com>, IETF AVT WG <avt@ietf.org>, IETF MMUSIC WG <mmusic@ietf.org>
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 20 Jul 2011 14:44:53.0984 (UTC) FILETIME=[964DC600:01CC46EB]
Subject: Re: [AVTCORE] [MMUSIC] Comment ondraft-westerlund-avtcore-multistream-and-simulcast
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: Wed, 20 Jul 2011 14:44:59 -0000

> -----Original Message-----
> From: mmusic-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:mmusic-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Cullen Jennings (fluffy)
> Sent: Wednesday, July 20, 2011 4:36 PM
> To: IETF AVT WG; IETF MMUSIC WG
> Subject: [MMUSIC] Comment ondraft-westerlund-avtcore-multistream-and-simulcast
> 
> 
> In the case were we want to use SDP to indicate video streams are simulcast of the same thing, I think it would be better to
> use the SDP grouping framework instead of using SSRC to indicate this.

As in:
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-begen-mmusic-redundancy-grouping/ 

> I also wonder, why not just use layered codecs, seems like outperform the simulcast approach. I read section 3.1 but don't
> really find it convincing that this simulcast is better than layered codecs.

The draft above provides some motivation why people would wanna transmit the same thing twice or more.
 
> _______________________________________________
> mmusic mailing list
> mmusic@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mmusic

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email