[Dart] Two comments on draft-york-dscp-rtp

"Black, David" <david.black@emc.com> Tue, 22 July 2014 18:58 UTC

Return-Path: <david.black@emc.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 45B091B279B for <dart@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 22 Jul 2014 11:58:46 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.702
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.702 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id lKJ6_QJZFFFz for <dart@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 22 Jul 2014 11:58:40 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mailuogwhop.emc.com (mailuogwhop.emc.com []) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id AC0C61A0442 for <dart@ietf.org>; Tue, 22 Jul 2014 11:58:40 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from maildlpprd06.lss.emc.com (maildlpprd06.lss.emc.com []) by mailuogwprd02.lss.emc.com (Sentrion-MTA-4.3.0/Sentrion-MTA-4.3.0) with ESMTP id s6MIwcYT000867 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Tue, 22 Jul 2014 14:58:39 -0400
X-DKIM: OpenDKIM Filter v2.4.3 mailuogwprd02.lss.emc.com s6MIwcYT000867
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=emc.com; s=jan2013; t=1406055519; bh=68YPlZxGqPiOOO7ANiPaQbFLld0=; h=From:To:Date:Subject:Message-ID:Content-Type: Content-Transfer-Encoding:MIME-Version; b=uKahkgQIO56Uv1Aktmq8FfXc+xtytEq9FiidbPgrZmxv+HeaTwKNrZR+77/3X0740 o8yake5qk3nAVAbpjYDj46KbV01uQ7spWazOAhehL0srAMb3hMlhWBkImMZi1v79YM EF2qXVp6XmsNNO3u82L9AgVWW1vRFVgw02wmhWZI=
X-DKIM: OpenDKIM Filter v2.4.3 mailuogwprd02.lss.emc.com s6MIwcYT000867
Received: from mailusrhubprd53.lss.emc.com (mailusrhubprd53.lss.emc.com []) by maildlpprd06.lss.emc.com (RSA Interceptor); Tue, 22 Jul 2014 11:58:29 -0700
Received: from mxhub11.corp.emc.com (mxhub11.corp.emc.com []) by mailusrhubprd53.lss.emc.com (Sentrion-MTA-4.3.0/Sentrion-MTA-4.3.0) with ESMTP id s6MIwT59027769 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=FAIL); Tue, 22 Jul 2014 14:58:29 -0400
Received: from mx15a.corp.emc.com ([]) by mxhub11.corp.emc.com ([]) with mapi; Tue, 22 Jul 2014 14:58:29 -0400
From: "Black, David" <david.black@emc.com>
To: Ben Campbell <ben@nostrum.com>, "dart@ietf.org" <dart@ietf.org>
Date: Tue, 22 Jul 2014 14:58:28 -0400
Thread-Topic: Two comments on draft-york-dscp-rtp
Thread-Index: Ac+l3uwrhoLa9JWpQEOyWpuWzU5SFw==
Message-ID: <8D3D17ACE214DC429325B2B98F3AE71207783F673F@MX15A.corp.emc.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
acceptlanguage: en-US
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Sentrion-Hostname: mailusrhubprd53.lss.emc.com
X-RSA-Classifications: DLM_1, public
Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dart/eXad8NulGr3sZZDvSxj0VigFlNI
Subject: [Dart] Two comments on draft-york-dscp-rtp
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, 22 Jul 2014 18:58:46 -0000

And I'll get a jump on tomorrow's session by passing along two comments from tsvwg discussion and an offline conversation today:

1) The SCTP language is insufficient.

The SCTP language should be strengthened to bluntly state that SCTP congestion control operates at the SCTP association (session) level, and *therefore* use of PHBs and DSCPs that cause reordering among streams (or anything else) within an SCTP association is a rather strong SHOULD NOT (modulo input tomorrow on whether to use RFC 2119 keywords in an Informational draft).

2) The reference to RFC 5764 on mux/demux of DTLS, RTP and STUN is also insufficient, as there are known problems w/that RFC.

The reference to RFC 5764 should be complemented by a reference to draft-petithuguenin-avtcore-rfc5764-mux-fixes:


> -----Original Message-----
> From: Dart [mailto:dart-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Ben Campbell
> Sent: Tuesday, July 22, 2014 2:33 PM
> To: dart@ietf.org
> Subject: [Dart] Meeting Materials
> Hi,
> The slides for tomorrow's meeting are available at
> https://datatracker.ietf.org/meeting/90/materials.html#wg-dart .
> Also, we are still recruiting for a jabber scribe, and a backup note taker for
> the meeting. These are great opportunities for glory and admiration from your
> peers!
> Thanks!
> Ben.
> _______________________________________________
> Dart mailing list
> Dart@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dart