Re: [httpstreaming] [dispatch] [conex] Q-HTTP

Mikael Abrahamsson <swmike@swm.pp.se> Fri, 12 November 2010 09:40 UTC

Return-Path: <swmike@swm.pp.se>
X-Original-To: httpstreaming@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: httpstreaming@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E1FBE3A6B16; Fri, 12 Nov 2010 01:40:22 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.588
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.588 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.011, BAYES_00=-2.599]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id S-L85U0nSg9y; Fri, 12 Nov 2010 01:40:22 -0800 (PST)
Received: from uplift.swm.pp.se (ipv6.swm.pp.se [IPv6:2a00:801::f]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id ACDEF3A6B12; Fri, 12 Nov 2010 01:40:20 -0800 (PST)
Received: by uplift.swm.pp.se (Postfix, from userid 501) id DA02B9C; Fri, 12 Nov 2010 10:40:51 +0100 (CET)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by uplift.swm.pp.se (Postfix) with ESMTP id D87529A; Fri, 12 Nov 2010 10:40:51 +0100 (CET)
Date: Fri, 12 Nov 2010 10:40:51 +0100 (CET)
From: Mikael Abrahamsson <swmike@swm.pp.se>
To: "DIAZ VIZCAINO, LUIS MIGUEL (LUIS MIGUEL)" <luismi.diaz@alcatel-lucent.com>
In-Reply-To: <3349FECF788C984BB34176D70A51782F168780B4@FRMRSSXCHMBSB3.dc-m.alcatel-lucent.com>
Message-ID: <alpine.DEB.1.10.1011121034250.1154@uplift.swm.pp.se>
References: <3349FECF788C984BB34176D70A51782F106701E2@FRMRSSXCHMBSB3.dc-m.alcatel-lucent.com> <C4064AF1C9EC1F40868C033DB94958C7031F0CA2@XMB-RCD-111.cisco.com> <alpine.DEB.1.10.1011102303170.2639@uplift.swm.pp.se> <C4064AF1C9EC1F40868C033DB94958C7031F10D0@XMB-RCD-111.cisco.com> <alpine.DEB.1.10.1011111616310.2639@uplift.swm.pp.se> <C4064AF1C9EC1F40868C033DB94958C7031F1154@XMB-RCD-111.cisco.com> <alpine.DEB.1.10.1011111806430.2639@uplift.swm.pp.se> <3349FECF788C984BB34176D70A51782F16877F3C@FRMRSSXCHMBSB3.dc-m.alcatel-lucent.com> <alpine.DEB.1.10.1011111957580.2639@uplift.swm.pp.se> <3349FECF788C984BB34176D70A51782F16877F68@FRMRSSXCHMBSB3.dc-m.alcatel-lucent.com> <alpine.DEB.1.10.1011112134270.2639@uplift.swm.pp.se> <3349FECF788C984BB34176D70A51782F16877F9C@FRMRSSXCHMBSB3.dc-m.alcatel-lucent.com> <alpine.DEB.1.10.1011120434120.1154@uplift.swm.pp.se> <3349FECF788C984BB34176D70A51782F168780B4@FRMRSSXCHMBSB3.dc-m.alcatel-lucent.com>
User-Agent: Alpine 1.10 (DEB 962 2008-03-14)
Organization: People's Front Against WWW
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; format=flowed; charset=US-ASCII
Cc: Ingemar Johansson S <ingemar.s.johansson@ericsson.com>, "GARCIA ARANDA, JOSE JAVIER \(JOSE JAVIER\)" <jose_javier.garcia_aranda@alcatel-lucent.com>, httpstreaming <httpstreaming@ietf.org>, "conex@ietf.org" <conex@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [httpstreaming] [dispatch] [conex] Q-HTTP
X-BeenThere: httpstreaming@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: Network based HTTP Streaming discussion list <httpstreaming.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/httpstreaming>, <mailto:httpstreaming-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/httpstreaming>
List-Post: <mailto:httpstreaming@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:httpstreaming-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/httpstreaming>, <mailto:httpstreaming-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 12 Nov 2010 09:40:23 -0000

On Fri, 12 Nov 2010, DIAZ VIZCAINO, LUIS MIGUEL (LUIS MIGUEL) wrote:

> And testing is just a MUST. We need to know what is going wrong for THAT 
> flow, because not all the applications/flows have the same requirements.

No, testing is not a MUST. If you need to know what is going on with THAT 
flow, then you make sure you have insight into what THAT flow is 
experiencing, you don't inject more traffic.

Your time would be much better spent developing an API into the client IP 
stack to give insight into what TCP/RTP is actually experiencing 
(timestamping used to deduce jitter etc) than to create *more* traffic 
when facing adverse conditions.

And since you say "flow". I run *routers*. Routers act on a per-packet 
basis. They don't act on flows. They act on precedence/dscp values in each 
packet and queue according to policy if it exists, otherwise it does FIFO.

I hate testing. I'd much rather have insight into real traffic than 
creating test traffic. Test traffic can look fine where the real traffic 
is not. It's just amazing that we're sitting here some 30 years after TCP 
was invented and still have no tools for users to see what TCP is doing, 
short of dumping the packets on their interface and running wireshark on 
it.

-- 
Mikael Abrahamsson    email: swmike@swm.pp.se