IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [codec] WG Review: Internet Wideband Audio Codec (codec)

Brian West <brian@freeswitch.org> Tue, 05 January 2010 18:47 UTC

Return-Path: <brian@freeswitch.org>
X-Original-To: codec@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: codec@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A7E413A6804; Tue, 5 Jan 2010 10:47:27 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.599
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id QwnugN7aPVpp; Tue, 5 Jan 2010 10:47:26 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-gx0-f217.google.com (mail-gx0-f217.google.com [209.85.217.217]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5690028C19B; Tue, 5 Jan 2010 10:47:25 -0800 (PST)
Received: by gxk9 with SMTP id 9so38203879gxk.8 for <multiple recipients>; Tue, 05 Jan 2010 10:47:19 -0800 (PST)
Received: by 10.101.113.1 with SMTP id q1mr22101492anm.115.1262717239775; Tue, 05 Jan 2010 10:47:19 -0800 (PST)
Received: from ?192.168.1.8? (adsl-99-58-242-148.dsl.tul2ok.sbcglobal.net [99.58.242.148]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id 20sm18881278iwn.1.2010.01.05.10.47.17 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=RC4-MD5); Tue, 05 Jan 2010 10:47:18 -0800 (PST)
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1077)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
From: Brian West <brian@freeswitch.org>
In-Reply-To: <4B438832.5020000@fas.harvard.edu>
Date: Tue, 05 Jan 2010 12:47:16 -0600
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <2A27C67D-7468-4437-9B2A-901C5DB7B2AA@freeswitch.org>
References: <4b33100a.01135e0a.2ab9.ffff8e9b@mx.google.com> <3D3C75174CB95F42AD6BCC56E5555B450204C143@FIESEXC015.nsn-intra.net> <20091223171501.7BAE33A697D@core3.amsl.com> <14093.1261593597@epsilon.noi.kre.to> <14853.1261600779@epsilon.noi.kre.to> <2401.1261648036@epsilon.noi.kre.to> <4b3373d7.02135e0a.241a.fffffb62@mx.google.com> <a123a5d60912241926l6f2255e3kc15d1d21573adeb9@mail.gmail.com> <B67FB114-FDA9-4431-A2E2-6ACF344B2EA7@cisco.com> <20100104214338.GF16373@besserwisser.org> <a123a5d61001041448q7bead803h78ca0573aff452da@mail.gmail.com>, <00e201ca8e2f$24858e20$6d90aa60$@us> <BCB3F026FAC4C145A4A3330806FEFDA93A55112524@EMBX01-HQ.jnpr.net> <FFDFEAE4-A758-41DA-A801-CC1078D25253@freeswitch.org> <4B438832.5020000@fas.harvard.edu>
To: bens@alum.mit.edu
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1077)
X-Mailman-Approved-At: Tue, 05 Jan 2010 10:48:52 -0800
Cc: "ietf@ietf.org" <ietf@ietf.org>, "kre@munnari.oz.au" <kre@munnari.oz.au>, "codec@ietf.org" <codec@ietf.org>, Richard Shockey <richard@shockey.us>, 'Patrik Fältström' <paf@cisco.com>, "iesg@ietf.org" <iesg@ietf.org>, 'Mans Nilsson' <mansaxel@besserwisser.org>, 'Phillip Hallam-Baker' <hallam@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [codec] WG Review: Internet Wideband Audio Codec (codec)
X-BeenThere: codec@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: "Should the IETF standardize wideband Internet codec\(s\)? " <codec.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/codec>, <mailto:codec-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/codec>
List-Post: <mailto:codec@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:codec-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/codec>, <mailto:codec-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 05 Jan 2010 18:47:27 -0000

Sending packets at lower intervals wouldn't fully solve issues related to this... you should never go over the MTU in practice anyway... and you shouldn't be running small packet times if you ever wish it to scale... sending anything less than 10ms packet times is wasteful for both the client and the server... but then again nobody seems to think of the server side of things when they design anything these days.... I just hope that everyone does consider that aspect.

/b

On Jan 5, 2010, at 12:42 PM, Benjamin M. Schwartz wrote:

> Brian West wrote:
>> Wouldn't this go over the MTU on the RTP packets and cause some issues on the public internet?
> 
> 1.  What's "this"?
> 2.  Send packets more frequently.

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email