RE: [FECFRAME-PROTO] SDP params for FEC

["Ali Begen \(abegen\)" <[e-mail]>]

Any more comments/prior experiences on how we should do the on-demand
model?

-acbegen 

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Rajiv Asati (rajiva) 
> Sent: Tuesday, September 25, 2007 5:23 AM
> To: Ali Begen (abegen); Mark Watson; [e-mail]
> Subject: RE: [FECFRAME-PROTO] SDP params for FEC
> 
> Hi Ali,
> 
> Please see inline,
> 
> > However, this offer/answer model does not let the receiver 
> ask for a 
> > particular FEC scheme from the sender. Does it? This can be 
> > particularly
> 
> Very good point. Sorry, I wasn't there at the meeting, but I 
> envision that the CDP would be able to provide this 
> interaction one way or another.
> 
> Cheers,
> Rajiv
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Ali Begen (abegen)
> > Sent: Saturday, September 22, 2007 8:48 PM
> > To: Mark Watson; [e-mail]
> > Subject: RE: [FECFRAME-PROTO] SDP params for FEC
> > 
> > Hi everyone,
> > 
> > Regarding the SDP signaling for FEC, I have something missing in my 
> > notes. As far as I remember, we mainly discussed the offer/answer 
> > model for our framework. That is, we said that the sender 
> could offer 
> > multiple (nested or not) FEC flows (each probably with different 
> > levels of protection, latency budgets, priority, etc) from 
> which the 
> > receiver(s) can select and join the corresponding multicast 
> group to 
> > receive the repair packets.
> > 
> > However, this offer/answer model does not let the receiver 
> ask for a 
> > particular FEC scheme from the sender. Does it? This can be 
> > particularly useful in unicast applications (or even in 
> multicast when 
> > there is a middle box that manages the sender on behalf of the 
> > receivers), where the receiver should be able to ask from 
> the sender 
> > whatever FEC it wants to receive or the receiver can let the sender 
> > know how much buffering it can tolerate. Remember the 
> min_buffer_time 
> > attribute? The receiver should also be able to set this ...
> > 
> > Can we do this by using the same FEC Framework Configuration 
> > Information and FEC-Scheme-Specific Information that we use for the 
> > offer/answer model? What is the best way to execute this 
> "on-demand" 
> > model?
> > 
> > Any thoughts?
> > 
> > -acbegen
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: Mark Watson [mailto:[e-mail]]
> > > Sent: Monday, September 10, 2007 4:06 PM
> > > To: Ali Begen (abegen); [e-mail]
> > > Subject: Re: [FECFRAME-PROTO] SDP params for FEC
> > > 
> > > Ali,
> > > 
> > > I agree. This is an important topic for next week.
> > > 
> > > The current fecframe draft envisages an approach similar to that 
> > > taken by the FEC Building Block in RMT. In this approach we would 
> > > define 'containers'
> > > for FEC-scheme-specific information, with the intention that each 
> > > FEC Scheme will define exactly the information it needs 
> and how it 
> > > should be coded into the container.
> > > 
> > > Content delivery protocols can then define mechanisms for 
> carrying 
> > > these 'containers' in a way which is independent of the 
> FEC Scheme 
> > > used.
> > > 
> > > So, the first task is for us to identify which 
> information is 'FEC 
> > > Scheme independent', for which we must define specific protocol 
> > > elements. This includes at least the identity of the FEC Scheme. 
> > > Then we can define a container for the FEC-Scheme-specific 
> > > information. In RMT, both kinds of information are referred to as 
> > > FEC Object Transmission Information.
> > > 
> > > FYI, in DVB they have their own XML-based 'Service Discovery and 
> > > Selection'
> > > scheme which is used to advertise services and communicate the 
> > > information needed to access the service (e.g. Multicast 
> address). 
> > > The FEC information is carried here too. DVB also defines RTSP 
> > > headers to negotiate this information.
> > > 
> > > ...Mark
> > > 
> > > 
> > > On 9/10/07 3:18 PM, "Ali Begen (abegen)" <[e-mail]> wrote:
> > > 
> > > > Hi everyone,
> > > > 
> > > > One topic that I believe we need to discuss is the 
> definition of 
> > > > FEC-related parameters within SDP. That is, we need to
> > > identify what
> > > > kind of FEC parameters need to be conveyed through SDP 
> between the
> > > > receiver(s) and sender(s) so that the senders generate the
> > > right FEC
> > > > and the receivers know what they receive. Possible
> > > parameters are the
> > > > session identifiers, protection period, block size, FEC
> > > coding scheme,
> > > > FEC type, annex type (sending arrangements), etc.
> > > > 
> > > > Some parameters are algorithm-specific (e.g., L and D
> > > values for CoP3
> > > > and the seed information for Raptor). We may need these 
> as well, 
> > > > however, we should have the right amount of abstraction.
> > > > 
> > > > As far as I know, there is not much about this in the
> > current IETF
> > > > documents. DVB is pushing for the hybrid FEC (CoP3 +
> > > Raptor), however,
> > > > I am not sure what is proposed to negogiate the
> > algorithm-specific
> > > > parameters between the receiver and sender. RFC 4756 is not
> > > much help
> > > > from this perspective, either.
> > > > 
> > > > I am hoping we can make a progress in this front and will
> > > have a draft
> > > > for the December meeting.
> > > > 
> > > > BTW, this work may require a joint collaboration between
> > > FECframe and
> > > > MMUSIC as well as AVT WGs.
> > > > 
> > > > Ali
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > >  
> > > > 
> > > >> -----Original Message-----
> > > >> From: Greg Shepherd [mailto:[e-mail]]
> > > >> Sent: Sunday, September 02, 2007 7:03 PM
> > > >> To: Michael Bany
> > > >> Cc: Ali Begen (abegen); Ulas Kozat; Marshall Eubanks;
> > Mark Pullen;
> > > >> [e-mail]; Shiloh Dorgan
> > > >> Subject: Re: [FECFRAME-PROTO] Re: FECFRAME Design Meeting
> > > in Fairfax
> > > >> 
> > > >> Yes, a bit.. Sorry I haven't sent something out before but
> > > I've been
> > > >> on the road the past week and still have more road ahead.
> > > >> 
> > > >> What we need first is for someone to volunteer to outline
> > > the current
> > > >> relevant work from the other groups, ie RMT
> > > >> 
> > > >> Mark is the primary keeper of our requirements draft 
> so we need 
> > > >> confirmation that he will be able to make the interim meeting.
> > > >> 
> > > >> Then with the requirements and an understanding of the current 
> > > >> relevant work we can begin to address what extensions are
> > > necessary
> > > >> to meet our goals of FECFrame.
> > > >> 
> > > >> So who is willing and able to provide the outline of
> > > current relevant
> > > >> work?
> > > >> 
> > > >> Thanks,
> > > >> Greg
> > > >> 
> > > >> On 9/2/07, Michael Bany <[e-mail]> wrote:
> > > >>> 
> > > >>> 
> > > >>> 
> > > >>> 
> > > >>> Do we have any kind of simple agenda?
> > > >>> 
> > > >>> 
> > > >>> 
> > > >>> 
> > > >>> 
> > > >>> From: Ali Begen (abegen) [mailto:[e-mail]]
> > > >>>  Sent: Friday, August 31, 2007 6:39 PM
> > > >>>  To: Michael Bany; Ulas Kozat; Marshall Eubanks
> > > >>> 
> > > >>>  Cc: Shiloh Dorgan; Mark Pullen; [e-mail]
> > > >>>  Subject: RE: [FECFRAME-PROTO] Re: FECFRAME Design Meeting
> > > >> in Fairfax
> > > >>> 
> > > >>> 
> > > >>> 
> > > >>> 
> > > >>> I will be driving from RTP on Saturday. So, I can join a
> > > dinner on
> > > >>> Sunday if anybody interested. I'll leave at 8pm on 18th
> > > out of DCA.
> > > >>> And, we can start at 9am on both days.
> > > >>> 
> > > >>> 
> > > >>> 
> > > >>> You all have a nice long weekend.
> > > >>> 
> > > >>> 
> > > >>> 
> > > >>> - Ali
> > > >>> 
> > > >>> 
> > > >>> 
> > > >>>  ________________________________
> > > >>> 
> > > >>> 
> > > >>> From: Michael Bany [mailto:[e-mail]]
> > > >>>  Sent: Thursday, August 30, 2007 5:01 PM
> > > >>>  To: Ulas Kozat; Marshall Eubanks
> > > >>>  Cc: Shiloh Dorgan; Mark Pullen; [e-mail]
> > > >>>  Subject: RE: [FECFRAME-PROTO] Re: FECFRAME Design Meeting
> > > >> in Fairfax
> > > >>> 
> > > >>> I will be arriving late night Sunday and depart out of
> > > >> Reagan National
> > > >>> at 5:30 pm on the 18th of September.
> > > >>> 
> > > >>> 
> > > >>> 
> > > >>> 
> > > >>> From: Ulas Kozat [mailto:[e-mail]]
> > > >>>  Sent: Thursday, August 30, 2007 6:59 PM
> > > >>>  To: Marshall Eubanks
> > > >>>  Cc: Shiloh Dorgan; Mark Pullen; [e-mail]
> > > >>>  Subject: Re: [FECFRAME-PROTO] Re: FECFRAME Design Meeting
> > > >> in Fairfax
> > > >>> 
> > > >>> 
> > > >>> 
> > > >>> 
> > > >>>  Greetings--
> > > >>> 
> > > >>>  I will be arriving late night Sunday and return back
> > on 18th (my
> > > >>> reserved flight leaves at 4:45pm from Reagan National).
> > > >>> 
> > > >>>  Do we have a tentative schedule/agenda? If the meetings
> > > >> will continue
> > > >>> until late evening on 18th, I might change my schedule.
> > > >>> 
> > > >>>  Ulas
> > > >>> 
> > > >>> 
> > > >>> On 8/30/07, Marshall Eubanks <[e-mail]> wrote:
> > > >>> 
> > > >>> OK, having waited for the dust to settle, and having 
> polled the 
> > > >>> members who wanted the other  dates, the Design team
> > > >> meeting will be
> > > >>> at George  Mason University 17-18 September. Our thanks
> > > to GMU for
> > > >>> offering the  space.
> > > >>> 
> > > >>>  Mark, Shiloh, can you recommend a nearby hotel ?
> > > >>> 
> > > >>>  Also, we will need directions to the exact site of 
> the meeting.
> > > >>> 
> > > >>>  Travel arrangements :
> > > >>> 
> > > >>>  Either Dulles (IAD) or National (DCA) airports have easy
> > > >> access to
> > > >>> GMU in Fairfax, Virginia.
> > > >>> 
> > > >>>  National even has subway (Metro) access -
> > > >>> 
> > > >>>  http://www.wmata.com/metrorail/systemmap.cfm
> > > >>> 
> > > >>>  Blue line to the Orange line, Orange line to Vienna, a
> > > >> short cab ride
> > > >>> or CUE bus ride to GMU.
> > > >>> 
> > > >>>  http://www.fairfaxva.gov/CUEBus/CUEBus.asp
> > > >>> 
> > > >>>  I would allow at least an hour for this. A cab ride from
> > > >> National or
> > > >>> Dulles will cost order $ 30, maybe more from Dulles.
> > > >>> 
> > > >>>  If anyone does not plan to have a car, please let me know.
> > > >> I can pick
> > > >>> up a limited number or people on the way in each morning.
> > > >> Like many
> > > >>> American suburbs, you will feel limited if you do not have
> > > >> a car, but
> > > >>> it is possible. The GMU campus itself is pretty spread out.
> > > >>> 
> > > >>>  http://coyote.gmu.edu/map/fairfax.html
> > > >>> 
> > > >>>  Baltimore Washington (BWI) is also possible but is a good
> > > >> 1 and 1/2
> > > >>> hour drive away at best and you have to go through or around 
> > > >>> Washington itself. I would not recommend it unless the
> > > flights are
> > > >>> really cheap.
> > > >>> 
> > > >>>    Be warned that DC has a very strong and typical rush
> > > >> "hour" (~6:30
> > > >>> to 9:00 AM, ~4:00 to 7:00 PM). There will probably be
> > > >> little traffic
> > > >>> on Sunday.
> > > >>> 
> > > >>>  If people come in early enough Sunday night we should
> > > have dinner.
> > > >>> 
> > > >>>  Regards
> > > >>>  Marshall
> > > >>> 
> > > >>> 
> > > >>> 
> > > >>> 
> > > >>>  On Aug 22, 2007, at 7:30 AM, Shiloh Dorgan wrote:
> > > >>> 
> > > >>>> Room 320 is reserved for the FECFRAME meeting 17-18 
> September.
> > > >>>> Parking is $8/day. Let me know if anyone needs links for
> > > >> directions
> > > >>>> or has any questions.
> > > >>>> 
> > > >>>> Shiloh
> > > >>>> 
> > > >>>> Mark Pullen wrote:
> > > >>>>> Marshall,
> > > >>>>> 
> > > >>>>> I'm happy to sponsor the meeting 17-18 Sep, on one 
> condition:
> > > >>>>> I must be able to invite my students to listen in. Also
> > > >> you should
> > > >>>>> know that while the room will be provided at no 
> cost, the  >>
> > > >>> participants will need to pay ($7/day if it has not gone
> > > >> up)  >> for
> > > >>> parking. They should use the parking desk and pay there.
> > > >>>>> The alternative is public transport- the Fairfax/GMU
> > > >> CUE bus  >>
> > > >>> provides an inexpensive shuttle to Vienna Metro and area
> > > hotels  >>
> > > >>> (see www.gmu.edu for info).
> > > >>>>> 
> > > >>>>> Assuming the above is OK, I'm asking Shiloh to reserve
> > > >> a room  >>
> > > >>> for you (Shiloh, start with 320 ST2 if available).
> > > >>>>> 
> > > >>>>> Mark
> > > >>>>> 
> > > >>>>> On Sun, 19 Aug 2007, Marshall Eubanks wrote:
> > > >>>>> 
> > > >>>>>> Dear Mark;
> > > >>>>>> 
> > > >>>>>> I am trying to find a place for a design team
> > meeting for the
> > > >>>>>> Fecframe IETF working group.
> > > >>>>>> 
> > > >>>>>> Fecframe is a new working group with a charter to  >>>  >>>
> > > >>> ...develop specifications for using  >>> forward error
> > correction
> > > >>> (FEC) codes with applications in the  >>> Internet  >>>
> > > to provide
> > > >>> protection against packet loss. The group will develop a
> > > >>>>> protocol
> > > >>> framework for application of FEC codes to arbitrary packet
> > > >>>>> flows
> > > >>> over unreliable transport protocols over both IP
> > > multicast and  >>>
> > > >>> unicast.
> > > >>>>>> 
> > > >>>>>> This has the potential to become an essential piece of
> > > >> technology
> > > >>>>>> underpinning IPTV.
> > > >>>>>> 
> > > >>>>>> We need to have a meeting of the design team (6
> > > >> people), and have
> > > >>>>>> settled on the week of  >>> September 17th. We estimate
> > > >> that this
> > > >>> will require the use of a  >>> room for a day and a half,
> > > >> but I would
> > > >>>>>> like to secure a room for 2 days in total (9 to 5) in
> > > >> case we run
> > > >>>>>> long.
> > > >>>>>> 
> > > >>>>>> At present, I think that everyone is available for
> > the entire
> > > >>>>>> week, and so room availability could determine  >>>
> > > >> which two days
> > > >>> we meet.
> > > >>>>>> 
> > > >>>>>> Do you think that there is any chance we could 
> meet at GMU ?
> > > >>>>>> Basically, we would need a
> > > >>>>>> conference room or classroom for 2 days. Let me know
> > > >> what you think.
> > > >>>>>> 
> > > >>>>>> Regards
> > > >>>>>> Marshall
> > > >>>>>> 
> > > >>> 
> > > >>> 
> > > >>>  _______________________________________________
> > > >>>  FECFRAME-PROTO mailing list
> > > >>>  [e-mail]
> > > >>>  https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/fecframe-proto
> > > >>> 
> > > >>> 
> > > >>> _______________________________________________
> > > >>> FECFRAME-PROTO mailing list
> > > >>> [e-mail]
> > > >>> https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/fecframe-proto
> > > >>> 
> > > >>> 
> > > >> 
> > > > 
> > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > FECFRAME-PROTO mailing list
> > > > [e-mail]
> > > > https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/fecframe-proto
> > > 
> > 
> > _______________________________________________
> > FECFRAME-PROTO mailing list
> > [e-mail]
> > https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/fecframe-proto
> > 
> 

_______________________________________________
FECFRAME-PROTO mailing list
[e-mail]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/fecframe-proto