[Gen-art] Gen-ART Last Call review of draft-ietf-avtcore-rtp-circuit-breakers-11

Meral Shirazipour <meral.shirazipour@ericsson.com> Wed, 09 December 2015 22:39 UTC

Return-Path: <meral.shirazipour@ericsson.com>
X-Original-To: gen-art@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: gen-art@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com []) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B865F1B2F2C for <gen-art@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 9 Dec 2015 14:39:07 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -4.199
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.199 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3] autolearn=ham
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id oK8ieIlqKw-W for <gen-art@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 9 Dec 2015 14:39:05 -0800 (PST)
Received: from usplmg21.ericsson.net (usplmg21.ericsson.net []) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 81B721B2F2B for <gen-art@ietf.org>; Wed, 9 Dec 2015 14:39:05 -0800 (PST)
X-AuditID: c6180641-f799c6d000007d66-5c-5668ad83417c
Received: from EUSAAHC003.ericsson.se (Unknown_Domain []) by usplmg21.ericsson.net (Symantec Mail Security) with SMTP id B0.5F.32102.38DA8665; Wed, 9 Dec 2015 23:38:59 +0100 (CET)
Received: from EUSAAMB107.ericsson.se ([]) by EUSAAHC003.ericsson.se ([]) with mapi id 14.03.0248.002; Wed, 9 Dec 2015 17:39:00 -0500
From: Meral Shirazipour <meral.shirazipour@ericsson.com>
To: "draft-ietf-avtcore-rtp-circuit-breakers.all@tools.ietf.org" <draft-ietf-avtcore-rtp-circuit-breakers.all@tools.ietf.org>, "gen-art@ietf.org" <gen-art@ietf.org>
Thread-Topic: Gen-ART Last Call review of draft-ietf-avtcore-rtp-circuit-breakers-11
Thread-Index: AdEy0mJIVIix8QFYTzmQIxJioDmk8Q==
Date: Wed, 9 Dec 2015 22:38:59 +0000
Message-ID: <ABCAA4EF18F17B4FB619EA93DEF7939A454B0D8A@eusaamb107.ericsson.se>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
x-originating-ip: []
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_ABCAA4EF18F17B4FB619EA93DEF7939A454B0D8Aeusaamb107erics_"
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Brightmail-Tracker: H4sIAAAAAAAAA+NgFvrALMWRmVeSWpSXmKPExsUyuXRPoG7z2owwgxNTtC2+9Hxis7j66jOL A5PHkiU/mTy+XP7MFsAUxWWTkpqTWZZapG+XwJWxtNWn4HNgxam/hxkbGLe4dzFyckgImEgs mXuMCcIWk7hwbz1bFyMXh5DAEUaJdavPM0E4yxglthzfzghSxSZgIbH993NWkISIwApGid63 H1lBEsICgRL79u0DGyUiECaxbMssVghbT2L+hlNgcRYBFYklD7eygdi8Ar4SR7ctYgGxGYFW fz+1BqyGWUBc4taT+VAnCUgs2XOeGcIWlXj5+B8rhK0osa9/OjtEfb7Eub0LWCBmCkqcnPmE ZQKj0Cwko2YhKZuFpAwiriOxYPcnNghbW2LZwtfMMPaZA4+ZkMUXMLKvYuQoLS7IyU03MtzE CIyHYxJsjjsY9/Z6HmIU4GBU4uH9kJAeJsSaWFZcmXuIUYKDWUmEN7QzI0yINyWxsiq1KD++ qDQntfgQozQHi5I4LyMDA4OQQHpiSWp2ampBahFMlomDU6qBsTZC8Ohpx0qleNkOjw3rFK+x rIxOU96caFgg6tSYd9YpXO5JpoHUgw2zFhyd3iS8p3mRtsn0YzPWc65al/GP4caq1W3hCye5 8q02ZTe5Wr1+HZuB6uYHpd5/D27y9rt6a+mnwE8WfQ9D31SEfxLYfSjuSGZZdf15a4nM1x2N J3f3aSltKg97osRSnJFoqMVcVJwIAOw8PVqDAgAA
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/gen-art/aW05RPv3n4ks3MBd0IM1OmSGRWw>
Subject: [Gen-art] Gen-ART Last Call review of draft-ietf-avtcore-rtp-circuit-breakers-11
X-BeenThere: gen-art@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: "GEN-ART: General Area Review Team" <gen-art.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/gen-art>, <mailto:gen-art-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/gen-art/>
List-Post: <mailto:gen-art@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gen-art-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/gen-art>, <mailto:gen-art-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 09 Dec 2015 22:39:07 -0000

I am the assigned Gen-ART reviewer for this draft. The General Area Review Team (Gen-ART) reviews all IETF documents being processed by the IESG for the IETF Chair.  Please treat these comments just like any other last call comments.

For more information, please see the FAQ at <http://wiki.tools.ietf.org/area/gen/trac/wiki/GenArtfaq>.

Document:  draft-ietf-avtcore-rtp-circuit-breakers-11
Reviewer: Meral Shirazipour
Review Date: 2015-12-09
IETF LC End Date:  2015-12-09
IESG Telechat date: NA

This draft is ready to be published as Standards Track RFC but I have some comments .

Major issues:

Minor issues:
-Based on list comment from Aug 7, 2015 :https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/avt/3MHdwQzBhpYzTiM5SJeHLnULEbs
It seems only one implementation tested this proposal and could not see the mechanism triggered.
If this is still the case, should the document be published as Standards track?

Nits/editorial comments:
-[Page 4], SSRC is not spelled out at first used, but later on Page 8.

-[Page 7], "o  X is estimated throughput"--->"o  X is the estimated throughput"

-[Page 11], Sec 4.2,  "is replaces MEDIA_TIMEOUT "---->"it replaces MEDIA_TIMEOUT "

-[Page 12], not sure about this comment since the sentence is too long:

"Packet loss is considered acceptable if a
      TCP flow across the same network path and experiencing the same
      network conditions would achieve an average throughput, measured
      on a reasonable time scale, that is not less than the RTP flow is
      achieving. "

suggestion: it is missing a "what"---->"...., that is not less than what the RTP flow is achieving."

-[Page 15], "There is an upper bound on the amount of loss can be corrected,"--missing 'that'-->"There is an upper bound on the amount of loss that can be corrected,"

-[Page 16], "SHOULD NOT be restarted automatically unless the sender has received information that the congestion has dissipated."
How will the sender receive that information? if would be clearer to add a sentence for that.

-[Page 16], last sentence, "a misbehaving phone"---suggestion--->"a misbehaving phone call"

-[Page 17], "ECN Feedback Report report"--suggestion-->"ECN Feedback Report"

-[Page 17],"in an compound"---->"in a compound"

-[Page 18], "purposes, others provided"---->"purposes, others provide"

-[Page 19], "to trigger and disrupting"---->to trigger and disrupt"

-General: The draft considers ECN... I was expecting to also see a note about ConEx or other future protocols and how they could potentially contribute to trigger congestion conditions.

Best Regards,
Meral Shirazipour