IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [AVTCORE] [tsvwg] [rtcweb] WG Last Call on changes: draft-ietf-avtcore-rtp-circuit-breakers-16

John Leslie <john@jlc.net> Tue, 28 June 2016 00:04 UTC

Return-Path: <john@jlc.net>
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 0D1EA12DAB6; Mon, 27 Jun 2016 17:04:07 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -4.026
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.026 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-1.426] 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 C7YmQYi1tzAn; Mon, 27 Jun 2016 17:04:05 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mailhost.jlc.net (mailhost.jlc.net [199.201.159.4]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3710412D7F8; Mon, 27 Jun 2016 17:04:05 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mailhost.jlc.net (Postfix, from userid 104) id ED3DBC9419; Mon, 27 Jun 2016 20:04:00 -0400 (EDT)
Date: Mon, 27 Jun 2016 20:04:00 -0400
From: John Leslie <john@jlc.net>
To: Colin Perkins <csp@csperkins.org>
Message-ID: <20160628000400.GA1223@verdi>
References: <E16BEA87-1D0F-48F1-A9AC-2729079D581D@tik.ee.ethz.ch> <8C16F1C6-B4A7-4BB4-B215-D7E7EAF308F8@erg.abdn.ac.uk> <CE03DB3D7B45C245BCA0D243277949362F59C41D@MX307CL04.corp.emc.com> <3E053A65-2698-4749-8E3D-E0451DF84011@ifi.uio.no> <BF6B00CC65FD2D45A326E74492B2C19FB76A6433@FR711WXCHMBA05.zeu.alcatel-lucent.com> <32a23d69d22062669f78df806a4eb6b8.squirrel@erg.abdn.ac.uk> <BF6B00CC65FD2D45A326E74492B2C19FB76A659B@FR711WXCHMBA05.zeu.alcatel-lucent.com> <CE03DB3D7B45C245BCA0D243277949362F5AEE02@MX307CL04.corp.emc.com> <6E35FB6C-CA98-413C-B7AE-75402A968017@ifi.uio.no> <3FD27BBF-8E2D-4A42-86A0-C4C0692FF8C9@csperkins.org>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <3FD27BBF-8E2D-4A42-86A0-C4C0692FF8C9@csperkins.org>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.1i
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/avt/r6R3DVBaVcz9x1AQfilMSnXfSNo>
Cc: "rtcweb@ietf.org" <rtcweb@ietf.org>, tsvwg <tsvwg@ietf.org>, Michael Welzl <michawe@ifi.uio.no>, IETF AVTCore WG <avt@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [AVTCORE] [tsvwg] [rtcweb] WG Last Call on changes: draft-ietf-avtcore-rtp-circuit-breakers-16
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: Tue, 28 Jun 2016 00:04:07 -0000

Colin Perkins <csp@csperkins.org> wrote:
>  On 27 Jun 2016, at 21:52, Michael Welzl <michawe@ifi.uio.no> wrote:
>
>> Why even bother considering CE-marks as information for a circuit breaker?
> 
> Because the alternative is that we only break the circuit once the queue
> has been driven into overflow, and packets have been lost.
> We want to avoid that, since it causes latency, and too much latency is
> very bad for the user experience. 

   If you want a circuit-breaker to control latency, why aren't you measuring
latency?

--
John Leslie <john@jlc.net>

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email