Re: [httpstreaming] Current Status and Our Goal

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

> -----Original Message-----
> From: [e-mail] [mailto:[e-mail]] On Behalf Of Qin Wu
> Sent: Sunday, September 26, 2010 9:20 PM
> To: [e-mail]
> Subject: [httpstreaming] Current Status and Our Goal
> 
> Hi, folks:
> We have planned to have a BarBOF in time for Beijing IETF meeting.

Could we get this scheduled for earlier in the week if possible?
 
> The primary goal of this BarBOF is to making sure that people agree on what problem (or problems) need to be solved;
> Some of these problems or interesting issues are summarized in my previous email available at
> (http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/httpstreaming/current/msg00002.html) which was raised by people who are
> interested
> in HTTP Streaming in the  DISPATCH mailing list before we move to this new discussion list.
> The other problems come from HTTP streaming Problem statement
> draft which I have updated recently
> (http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-wu-http-streaming-optimization-ps-01.txt).

I have two major comments on this draft:
1- There is an acronym pollution which results from referring to several different specifications at the same time. I strongly suggest to have a definitions section and simply adopt the definitions from the most mature spec, which is the 3gpp spec as of now.
2- There are many strong claims which (mostly) favor HTTP streaming compared to other approaches. I can understand the bias, however, I would recommend staying away from making claims without proper proof or citation. This will help us have a more fair problem statement document.
 
> Another goal is to make sure we have not any overlapping with other SDO.

We *can* certainly have an overlapping goal, why should not we if we decide to move forward? If we think we have a better solution for a problem, we should propose and document it. There is indeed a timing issue since other groups have started working on this long before. But, if needed, we can catch up quickly.

> In order to stimulate the discussion toward these two goals, I have crafted intial charter skeleton.
> http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/httpstreaming/current/msg00003.html

That is a pretty loaded charter. I hope the mailing list discussion will get us to a better position before the meeting.
 
> I would like us to center around these problems we listed and the intial charter skeleton I drafted to figure out
> (a) what kind of use cases can we  have
> (b) and how many problems are worth being discussed
> (c) Is there any challenging issues we missed or neglected?
> (d) and what kind of concrete protocol/mechanism/scheme can we  come up with?
> 
> Also I would like to point out some related works in IETF for your references. Curretly what we have on the table includes:
> Apples' HTTP live streaming
> http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-pantos-http-live-streaming-04
> HTTP Streaming Problem Statement
> http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-wu-http-streaming-optimization-ps-001
> Implications of Full-Duplex HTTP
> http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-zhu-http-fullduplex-01
> If there is any related work missing or wrong, please let me know. Also I would like to encourage people to bring your
> contributions
> and thoughts in draft to this discussion list.

Cheers, acbegen.
 
> Regards!
> -Qin