Re: [GGIE] Proposing an actual BoF for IETF 105 in Montreal, looking for volunteers and suggestions

Hi Jake

thanks for putting this together. A couple of non-urgent comments:
1) You might want to say a few things about audio probably. It has some bw
reqs, too. And maybe point cloud since you mentioned VR already.
2) Live vs. on-demand should be mentioned explicitly IMO as again they have
quite a bit different bw and caching implications.
3) Also different and asymmetric networks (wifi vs lte vs dsl, etc.)
probably deserves a few paragraphs as well.

Cheers,
-acbegen

On Mon, Jul 8, 2019 at 1:36 AM Holland, Jake <jholland@akamai.com> wrote:

> Hi mops folks,
>
>
>
> My contribution morphed slightly, but I’ve submitted a draft I hope will
> be useful:
>
> https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-jholland-mops-taxonomy-00
>
>
>
> Chairs: can I have about 15 minutes to present?
>
>
>
> I’ve tried to make this draft a start at a taxonomy of networking issues
> in media operations.  It includes the video scaling issue, but also a few
> other issues that occurred to me, as things I’ve wished I could point
> people to a document about in the past.
>
>
>
> I think there’s probably a lot more that could be added and refined, but
> if a document like this seems like a useful direction, I’d be willing to
> flesh it out and try to make it into a more complete overview of known
> considerations worth thinking about when trying to work out networked video
> solutions in practice.
>
>
>
> Please read and give feedback if you’ve got any, there’s still a good 24.5
> hours until the deadline, so plenty of time to update...
>
>
>
> - Jake
>
>
>
> (PS: do we have a mops mailing list yet?)
>
>
>
> *From: *"Holland, Jake" <jholland@akamai.com>
> *Date: *2019-06-04 at 10:26
> *To: *Leslie Daigle <ldaigle@thinkingcat.com>, "ggie@ietf.org" <
> ggie@ietf.org>
> *Subject: *Re: [GGIE] Proposing an actual BoF for IETF 105 in Montreal,
> looking for volunteers and suggestions
>
>
>
> Hi guys,
>
>
>
> Sorry for the delayed response.
>
>
>
> I’ve been attending these and I wanted to take a moment to express support
> for creating a mops working group.  I’ve found the meeting so far valuable,
> and I hope they’ll be more valuable going forward, if the group becomes a
> normal working group.
>
>
>
> I presented at a couple of these meetings, most recently a presentation
> about the scale of media delivery titled “Multicast Video: Motivating
> Observations”:
>
>
> https://yana.techark.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/04/ietf104-vig-multicast-video.pdf
> <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__yana.techark.org_wp-2Dcontent_uploads_2019_04_ietf104-2Dvig-2Dmulticast-2Dvideo.pdf&d=DwMGaQ&c=96ZbZZcaMF4w0F4jpN6LZg&r=bqnFROivDo_4iF8Z3R4DyNWKbbMeXr0LOgLnElT1Ook&m=LlaiDQnX01BtPrtiQBbe5oOyjhHqsmaiQPXc1S27-zE&s=RIYHQUHhV4-J27VB5hivnpLba9mGsulLu9BZMQ8QIS8&e=>
>
>
>
> I’m working on reframing some of the observations presented there into an
> I-D as a problem statement of the scalability issues in today’s video
> delivery landscape.
>
>
>
> I hadn’t thought of it as having great archival value since the numbers
> I’ve got in that first presentation are just sort of a snapshot, but I
> think there’s a useful point in there that’s a little more timeless or that
> can capture an important trend, and I’m thinking about how to express it,
> and tentatively aiming to submit something for the first proposed slot in
> the agenda (about scope of video).  (Co-authors would be most welcome, if
> you’ve got some insights or good numbers on this topic :) )
>
>
>
> Another thing I’d love to get out of this group at some point is a roadmap
> document about the various video-related and video-delivery-related
> standards, ideally with some pointers about implementation status, and
> maybe a bit of history and the motivating factors for the tradeoffs made in
> the different designs.  I get confused every time I try to figure that
> stuff out, and I’m hoping someone who knows it better will take the time to
> write it up and give a good overview as it relates to media delivery.
>  (Additionally, I’ve found the presentations so far very helpful for
> staying informed about the networking aspects of the various approaches
> people are trying, as they struggle to handle the deluge of video data.)
>
>
>
> I wish the presentations so far had been recorded and archived, as I think
> there has been some good stuff covered.  On a couple of occasions I’ve gone
> and looked back at the presentations that were so graciously and helpfully
> posted at yana.techark.org, and asked the authors or presenters some
> follow-up questions later, but I sometimes wished I could review the
> presentations, as I’ve been able to do with the regular working group
> meetings on youtube.
>
>
>
> It’s my opinion that the networking-related issues driven by media
> delivery (particularly the scaling issues and the real-time requirements,
> where those are a factor) are really worthwhile to examine in detail, and
> to consider various proposed solutions in a context like IETF, with access
> to and comments from networking experts and network operators.
>
>
>
> Sorry I’ve been unresponsive on this, and I know there’s deadlines coming
> up.  It’s not quite my top priority and I’ve had several other fairly
> urgent things going, but I consider this group to be filling an important
> role at the IETF, at least for my purposes there, and I’d like to see it
> normalized.
>
>
>
> I also have some comments on the draft charter that was recently sent out,
> I’ll send those in a follow-up.
>
>
>
> Best regards,
>
> Jake
>
>
>
> *From: *Leslie Daigle <ldaigle@thinkingcat.com>
> *Date: *2019-05-29 at 11:01
> *To: *"ggie@ietf.org" <ggie@ietf.org>
> *Subject: *[GGIE] Proposing an actual BoF for IETF 105 in Montreal,
> looking for volunteers and suggestions
>
>
>
> Hi,
>
> We’ve been working with Éric to see about having a “Media OPS” bof in
> Montreal, and I’ve copied a draft agenda/proposal framework, below.
> Comments welcome.
>
> As the BoF request deadline is approaching, I’d like to get some firm
> commits on concrete contributions (I-Ds are ideal; presentations are
> possible). If you have a contribution you’d like to share in the agenda,
> please let me know; if you’ve already heard from me with a request, I’ll be
> following up :^) .
>
> Media OPerationS (MOPS) BoF
> Area: OPS
> Chairs: Leslie Daigle (ldaigle@thinkingcat.com), Glenn Deen (
> glenn.deen@nbcuni.com)
>
> Agenda
>
> 0/ Agenda bash
>
> 1/ Scope of video on the Internet
> <contributions solicited>
>
> 2/ Video using IETF technologies
> <contributions solicited; I was thinking that LURK and OpenCache might fit
> well here, again>
>
> 3/ Open questions for IETF and video
>
> AOB
>
> Full description of BoF:
>
> Internet- and Internet-protocol-delivered video/media is popular, leading
> to significant technology development across industries not traditionally
> thought of as Internet technology developers or operators, as well as
> considerable quantities of traffic on local and transit networks. Continued
> development of Internet-using technologies should be properly coordinated
> in order to ensure that the existing technologies are well-utilized, and
> new ones are developed in sympathy with the Internet’s core protocols and
> design.
>
> The purpose of this BoF is to highlight the many existing video activities
> that are leveraging IETF protocol work, identify gaps in IETF work and/or
> areas of incompatibility with video technology development efforts being
> carried out elsewhere, and identify a core group of IETF participants
> working on video activities across the IETF’s technology areas.
>
> Conflicts to avoid: ???
>
> Expected attendance: 40
>
> Length of session: 90min
>
> Leslie.
>
> --
> ------------------------------
>
> Leslie Daigle
> Principal, ThinkingCat Enterprises
> ldaigle@thinkingcat.com
> _______________________________________________
> GGIE mailing list
> GGIE@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ggie
>