[Dart] Treatment of RTCP (was Re: Colin Perkins comments - WGLC: draft-ietf-dart-dscp-rtp-02)

Ben Campbell <ben@nostrum.com> Tue, 26 August 2014 14:16 UTC

Return-Path: <ben@nostrum.com>
X-Original-To: dart@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: dart@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com []) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id EB8391A702E; Tue, 26 Aug 2014 07:16:28 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.568
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.568 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.668] autolearn=ham
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 9T2lgqDlMyMi; Tue, 26 Aug 2014 07:16:24 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from nostrum.com (raven-v6.nostrum.com [IPv6:2001:470:d:1130::1]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A9AA11A7023; Tue, 26 Aug 2014 07:16:24 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [] (cpe-173-172-146-58.tx.res.rr.com []) (authenticated bits=0) by nostrum.com (8.14.9/8.14.7) with ESMTP id s7QEGC2E085675 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NO); Tue, 26 Aug 2014 09:16:13 -0500 (CDT) (envelope-from ben@nostrum.com)
X-Authentication-Warning: raven.nostrum.com: Host cpe-173-172-146-58.tx.res.rr.com [] claimed to be []
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 7.3 \(1878.6\))
From: Ben Campbell <ben@nostrum.com>
In-Reply-To: <5B9EC18C-A2E6-4A62-AF5F-C24A09AEC7F0@csperkins.org>
Date: Tue, 26 Aug 2014 09:16:11 -0500
X-Mao-Original-Outgoing-Id: 430755371.548291-a6cbdebbc0c56f496d11c0ab61f26568
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <F6194F9F-701F-459B-8B4D-8FA10F0522FF@nostrum.com>
References: <em0263d12c-c65b-4a0c-b34d-369b21415bc4@sydney> <5B9EC18C-A2E6-4A62-AF5F-C24A09AEC7F0@csperkins.org>
To: Colin Perkins <csp@csperkins.org>, "Paul E. Jones" <paulej@packetizer.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1878.6)
Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dart/Y63PYWIpkoIqw2RN3UmOIczoNZk
Cc: "draft-ietf-dart-dscp-rtp.all@tools.ietf.org" <draft-ietf-dart-dscp-rtp.all@tools.ietf.org>, "Black, David" <david.black@emc.com>, "dart@ietf.org" <dart@ietf.org>, "avt@ietf.org WG" <avt@ietf.org>
Subject: [Dart] Treatment of RTCP (was Re: Colin Perkins comments - WGLC: draft-ietf-dart-dscp-rtp-02)
X-BeenThere: dart@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: "\"DiffServ Applied to RTP Transports discussion list\"" <dart.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/dart>, <mailto:dart-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/dart/>
List-Post: <mailto:dart@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:dart-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dart>, <mailto:dart-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 26 Aug 2014 14:16:29 -0000

On Aug 26, 2014, at 5:17 AM, Colin Perkins <csp@csperkins.org> wrote:

>>>> Getting feedback to the sender is important, though. In an ideal world, I would argue that RTCP packets should be marked with whatever DSCP value will deliver RTCP packets in the most expedient way. Since we don't have an ideal world, I don't know which DSCP value that would be.
>>> Would the starting positions of "getting feedback is important, even of not for RTT estimates" and "we need RTCP for RTT estimates" likely land on the same guidance for DSCP values?
>>> The argument to send RTCP packets in the most expedient way sounds reasonable. I don't know if we need to recommend a particular DSCP, since we already have quite a bit of text on how DSCPs might (or might not) map into some predictable PHB treatment.
>> Good question and valid point.  Nowhere in the document do we recommend the use of a particular DSCP value for any particular thing, and we should not recommend a particular value for RTCP in this document.  I'm just not sure what statements should be made.
>> I suspect we can all agree that RTCP information is important.  It's just the DSCP-related guidance that goes with that that is challenging.
> I don’t agree that RTCP information should be sent as higher priority than the media. Ideally, it should be sent with the same priority as the media, so it can be used to sample the RTT. This RTT sample is independent of RMCAT. It’s in base RTP specification, and so is something we need to support to the extent possible. 
> Since not all the media sent by a single SSRC has the same marking, my suggestion would be that each SSRC mark the RTCP packets it sends with one of the same code points as it uses to mark the media. Since RTCP is somewhat important, it would make sense for each SSRC to mark the RTCP packets it sends using the highest priority code point it uses to mark the RTP media packets it sends.

That makes sense to me. Paul, and others, do you agree with that last paragraph?