Re: [AVTCORE] I-D Action: draft-ietf-avtcore-monarch-21.txt

[Glen Zorn <[e-mail]>]

On 09/21/2012 04:38 PM, Colin Perkins wrote:

...

> I'm a little confused by the  changes to this draft. The last
 > paragraph of the Introduction now has a strong focus on definition of
 > new metrics, and explicitly refers to the RFC 6390 guidelines for
 > defining new metrics. However, we've been pretty consistent that new
 > RTCP XR report blocks don't define new metrics, but rather explicitly
 > convey metrics that have been defined elsewhere.
 >
 > I'd suggest changing:
 >
 > In the Performance Metrics Framework [RFC6390], guidelines for
 > Considering New Performance Metric Development are provided. The
 > objective of this document is to describe an extensible RTP
 > monitoring framework to provide a small number of re-usable Quality
 > of Service (QoS) / QoE metrics which facilitate reduced
 > implementation costs and help maximize inter-operability. The
 > "Guidelines for Extending the RTP Control Protocol (RTCP)" [RFC5968]
 > has stated that, where RTCP is to be extended with a new metric, the
 > preferred mechanism is by the addition of a new RTCP XR [RFC3611]
 > block. This memo assumes that all the guidelines from RFC 5968 must
 > apply on top of the guidelines in this document. In the Performance
 > Metrics Framework [RFC6390], guidelines for Considering New
 > Performance Metric Development are provided. When new performance
 > metrics are specified, they must follow the RFC 6390 rules:
 > specifically, the performance metric definition template (see
 > section 5.4.4, RFC 6390) must be used.
 >
 > to:
 >
 > The objective of this document is to describe an extensible RTP
 > monitoring framework to provide a small number of re-usable Quality
 > of Service (QoS) / QoE metrics which facilitate reduced
 > implementation costs and help maximize inter-operability. The
 > "Guidelines for Extending the RTP Control Protocol (RTCP)" [RFC5968]
 > has stated that, where RTCP is to be extended with a new metric, the
 > preferred mechanism is by the addition of a new RTCP XR [RFC3611]
 > block. This memo assumes that all the guidelines from RFC 5968 must
 > apply on top of the guidelines in this document. Guidelines for
 > developing new performance metrics are specified in [RFC6390]. New
 > RTCP XR report block definitions should not define new performance
 > metrics, but should rather refer to metrics defined elsewhere. It is
 > expected that the referenced metrics will conform to [RFC6390].

I think that that is all fine, except the last sentence.  To give one 
example from a draft currently under discussion, 
draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-pdv uses metrics developed by ITU-T.  Can we 
reasonably expect that ITU-T metrics will conform to RFC 6390?

>
 > Colin
 >
 >