Re: [httpstreaming] QoE feedback support

"Ali C. Begen (abegen)" <abegen@cisco.com> Wed, 10 November 2010 15:32 UTC

Return-Path: <abegen@cisco.com>
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 3ED613A699A for <httpstreaming@core3.amsl.com>; Wed, 10 Nov 2010 07:32:45 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -10.449
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-10.449 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.150, BAYES_00=-2.599, MIME_8BIT_HEADER=0.3, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-8]
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 vBJV5X59A49J for <httpstreaming@core3.amsl.com>; Wed, 10 Nov 2010 07:32:43 -0800 (PST)
Received: from sj-iport-5.cisco.com (sj-iport-5.cisco.com [171.68.10.87]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D5D183A698E for <httpstreaming@ietf.org>; Wed, 10 Nov 2010 07:32:42 -0800 (PST)
Authentication-Results: sj-iport-5.cisco.com; dkim=neutral (message not signed) header.i=none
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: AvsEAL5J2kyrR7Hu/2dsb2JhbACiNXGiTZswhUoEhFqJD4Jl
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.59,178,1288569600"; d="scan'208";a="283982617"
Received: from sj-core-5.cisco.com ([171.71.177.238]) by sj-iport-5.cisco.com with ESMTP; 10 Nov 2010 15:33:10 +0000
Received: from xbh-sjc-231.amer.cisco.com (xbh-sjc-231.cisco.com [128.107.191.100]) by sj-core-5.cisco.com (8.13.8/8.14.3) with ESMTP id oAAFXALE004883; Wed, 10 Nov 2010 15:33:10 GMT
Received: from xmb-sjc-215.amer.cisco.com ([171.70.151.169]) by xbh-sjc-231.amer.cisco.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.4675); Wed, 10 Nov 2010 07:33:09 -0800
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5
Content-class: urn:content-classes:message
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="Windows-1252"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Date: Wed, 10 Nov 2010 07:32:41 -0800
Message-ID: <04CAD96D4C5A3D48B1919248A8FE0D540DA670CF@xmb-sjc-215.amer.cisco.com>
In-Reply-To: <BCAD297FC0C0D244894589EE45FE8B470FF21A9D8B@ESESSCMS0364.eemea.ericsson.se>
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
Thread-Topic: [httpstreaming] QoE feedback support
Thread-Index: AcuA55sVlUKpEd3XQBSBesf8npc0JQAAmiGwAABzzGA=
References: <04CAD96D4C5A3D48B1919248A8FE0D540DA6707F@xmb-sjc-215.amer.cisco.com><B8EF0FF5-6753-4841-9E79-F407C5CD1A40@apple.com> <B4DD6B85-F204-42DB-B442-A16EF2124B2D@cisco.com> <BCAD297FC0C0D244894589EE45FE8B470FF21A9D8B@ESESSCMS0364.eemea.ericsson.se>
From: "Ali C. Begen (abegen)" <abegen@cisco.com>
To: =?Windows-1252?Q?Gunnar_Heikkil=E4?= <gunnar.heikkila@ericsson.com>, "David Singer" <singer@apple.com>
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 10 Nov 2010 15:33:09.0931 (UTC) FILETIME=[945337B0:01CB80EC]
Cc: Ingemar Johansson S <ingemar.s.johansson@ericsson.com>, httpstreaming <httpstreaming@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [httpstreaming] QoE feedback support
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: Wed, 10 Nov 2010 15:32:45 -0000

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Gunnar Heikkilä [mailto:gunnar.heikkila@ericsson.com]
> Sent: Wednesday, November 10, 2010 11:26 PM
> To: Ali C. Begen (abegen); David Singer
> Cc: Ingemar Johansson S; httpstreaming; Gunnar Heikkilä
> Subject: RE: [httpstreaming] QoE feedback support
> 
> The acronym QoE is maybe not the best choice of name, but the concept allows the 3GPP operator to get a better

It is not the best choice and actually it is pretty misleading.

> understanding on how the streaming service works for the end client. Some more integrated services (like circuit-switched
> AMR voice) can typically be handled by measuring things within the 3GPP network itself (for instance codec mode
> adaptation, frame loss etc.), but other services (like HTTP streaming) have a lot more freedom for the end client to decide
> how to play out the media.

Indeed. That's why we should not call it QoE.
 
> This is a good thing, as clients can choose different strategies to satisfy the end user, but it also means that it is difficult for
> the operator to understand if his network works good enough for these type of services. The metrics reported back from the
> client are typically things which are not possible to measure in the network, but which does affect the media "enjoyment" a
> lot. For instance, the length of the initial buffering, or any re-buffering occurances etc.
> 
> Not rocket science, not perfect, but still information which help the operator to see a more complete picture of his network
> and the services used...

I am all for reporting useful stuff from the clients in an extensible and modular way.

-acbegen
 
> /Gunnar
> 
> ________________________________
> 
> From: httpstreaming-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:httpstreaming-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Ali C. Begen (abegen)
> Sent: on 10 november 2010 15:57
> To: David Singer
> Cc: Ingemar Johansson S; httpstreaming
> Subject: Re: [httpstreaming] QoE feedback support
> 
> 
> Sure but this does not answer my question afaict.
> 
> 
> -acbegen
> 
> On Nov 10, 2010, at 9:09 PM, "David Singer" <singer@apple.com> wrote:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 	On Nov 10, 2010, at 13:52 , Ali C. Begen (abegen) wrote:
> 
> 	> I really find it very unattractive to call this stuff QoE reporting/feedback. Give me one example on what metric
> would measure my level of pleasure from a streaming service ;)
> 	>
> 	> -acbegen
> 	>
> 	>> -----Original Message-----
> 	>> From: httpstreaming-bounces@ietf.org [ <mailto:httpstreaming-bounces@ietf.org> mailto:httpstreaming-
> bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Ingemar Johansson S
> 	>> Sent: Wednesday, November 10, 2010 8:42 PM
> 	>> To: httpstreaming
> 	>> Subject: [httpstreaming] QoE feedback support
> 	>>
> 	>> FYI
> 	>>
> 	>> This document describes how QoE support is proposed for HTTP streaming in 3GPP.
> 	>> <http://www.3gpp.org/ftp/tsg_sa/WG4_CODEC/Ad-hoc_MBS/Docs_AHI/S4-AHI118.zip>
> http://www.3gpp.org/ftp/tsg_sa/WG4_CODEC/Ad-hoc_MBS/Docs_AHI/S4-AHI118.zip
> 	>> I suspect that there exist a newer version and/or a better description.
> 	>>
> 
> 	we were actually just discussing this area at a 3G meeting, and I realized that there are really two kinds of metrics it
> is useful to get from clients:
> 
> 	a) truly Qo Experience, that is, experiential metrics -- the mismatch between the user's expectation, and reality (tune-
> in delay, media they wanted to see but did not, and so on)
> 	b) operational metrics -- amount of data fetched, buffer sizes maintained, and so on
> 
> 	There are some in the middle, like bandwidth experienced, which are both operational and affect experience.
> 
> 	David Singer
> 	Multimedia and Software Standards, Apple Inc.
> 
>