Re: [httpstreaming] [AVT] Fw: Agenda and Slides

Colin Perkins <csp@csperkins.org> Sun, 07 November 2010 16:36 UTC

Return-Path: <csp@csperkins.org>
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 C9BC03A67B4 for <httpstreaming@core3.amsl.com>; Sun, 7 Nov 2010 08:36:08 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -103.599
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-103.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
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 RzhEojT1-MAn for <httpstreaming@core3.amsl.com>; Sun, 7 Nov 2010 08:36:07 -0800 (PST)
Received: from anchor-msapost-2.mail.demon.net (anchor-msapost-2.mail.demon.net [195.173.77.165]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id F3BF23A67AB for <httpstreaming@ietf.org>; Sun, 7 Nov 2010 08:36:06 -0800 (PST)
Received: from [211.154.201.18] (helo=[172.31.15.236]) by anchor-post-2.mail.demon.net with esmtpsa (AUTH csperkins-dwh) (TLSv1:AES128-SHA:128) (Exim 4.69) id 1PF8EC-00016a-ll; Sun, 07 Nov 2010 16:36:25 +0000
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1081)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252
From: Colin Perkins <csp@csperkins.org>
In-Reply-To: <3151D5E6-E534-4C1D-978E-7F214B31DFB2@niven-jenkins.co.uk>
Date: Mon, 8 Nov 2010 00:36:15 +0800
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <068E7ECD-1435-402A-BC1E-3ADCBF023BC7@csperkins.org>
References: <249792B19B4845578D9BDC3F77C12D68@china.huawei.com> <58D167AC-E817-4256-88D0-42E36492C562@niven-jenkins.co.uk> <04CAD96D4C5A3D48B1919248A8FE0D540D9B4260@xmb-sjc-215.amer.cisco.com> <3151D5E6-E534-4C1D-978E-7F214B31DFB2@niven-jenkins.co.uk>
To: Ben Niven-Jenkins <ben@niven-jenkins.co.uk>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1081)
Cc: httpstreaming@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [httpstreaming] [AVT] Fw: Agenda and Slides
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: Sun, 07 Nov 2010 16:36:08 -0000

On 8 Nov 2010, at 00:15, Ben Niven-Jenkins wrote:
> On 7 Nov 2010, at 16:04, Ali C. Begen (abegen) wrote:
...
>>> From: avt-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:avt-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Ben Niven-Jenkins
>>> Colleagues,
>>> 
>>> Reading the slides I'd like to make some comments in advance of the bar-bof, we can discuss them more via the mailing list
>>> or in the bar-BoF itself.
>>> 
>>> HTTP_Stream_1.ppt Slide 14:
>>> 
>>> "
>>> No distinction regular HTTP traffic from HTTP Streaming traffic
>>> Disadvantage:
>>>  Transport streaming media in the same way as web page
>>>  transport Streaming media has no priority to be delivered/processed first
>>> "
>>> 
>>> This is not correct, it is possible to apply different treatment to HTTP Streaming traffic Vs "regular" web page traffic, e.g. by
>>> the server setting different TOS/DSCP for streaming Vs "web" traffic.
>> 
>> If the network will not respect to these code points (which is the case in the open Internet), this won’t help but the servers themselves can prioritize anything they want to in their scheduling or processing. But, I am having difficulty in understanding why this is relevant to a standardization work. It looks to me as a product feature differentiation.
> 
> Agreed. IMO this is purely a deployment/implementation issue and not something that needs any standardisation.

It *might* make sense if the aim were to add an HTTP header to mark HTTP streaming requests, so that a web proxy treated them differently? (i.e., differentiation at the HTTP service layer, not at the network layer).

Colin