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

"Ali C. Begen (abegen)" <abegen@cisco.com> Sun, 07 November 2010 16:04 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 A85BF3A67B1 for <httpstreaming@core3.amsl.com>; Sun, 7 Nov 2010 08:04:05 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -10.599
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-10.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, 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 ADmEl9JRA0QK for <httpstreaming@core3.amsl.com>; Sun, 7 Nov 2010 08:04:04 -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 C3E233A679C for <httpstreaming@ietf.org>; Sun, 7 Nov 2010 08:04:04 -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: AvsEAEdc1kyrR7Hu/2dsb2JhbACiC3GdZ5pMhUgEhFiJDQ
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.58,310,1286150400"; d="scan'208";a="282214758"
Received: from sj-core-5.cisco.com ([171.71.177.238]) by sj-iport-5.cisco.com with ESMTP; 07 Nov 2010 16:04:23 +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 oA7G4NK1015086; Sun, 7 Nov 2010 16:04:23 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); Sun, 7 Nov 2010 08:04:23 -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: Sun, 7 Nov 2010 08:04:15 -0800
Message-ID: <04CAD96D4C5A3D48B1919248A8FE0D540D9B4260@xmb-sjc-215.amer.cisco.com>
In-Reply-To: <58D167AC-E817-4256-88D0-42E36492C562@niven-jenkins.co.uk>
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
Thread-Topic: [AVT] Fw: [httpstreaming] Agenda and Slides
Thread-Index: Act+lCZPhTGd8cIES+OLcMbO/UX1kQAALqag
References: <249792B19B4845578D9BDC3F77C12D68@china.huawei.com> <58D167AC-E817-4256-88D0-42E36492C562@niven-jenkins.co.uk>
From: "Ali C. Begen (abegen)" <abegen@cisco.com>
To: "Ben Niven-Jenkins" <ben@niven-jenkins.co.uk>, "Qin Wu" <sunseawq@huawei.com>
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 07 Nov 2010 16:04:23.0510 (UTC) FILETIME=[71D36F60:01CB7E95]
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 16:04:05 -0000

Interestingly, several other lists were copied to this email but not the main httpstreaming list. I would recommend dropping other lists. One comment inline.

> -----Original Message-----
> From: avt-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:avt-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Ben Niven-Jenkins
> Sent: Sunday, November 07, 2010 11:54 PM
> To: Qin Wu
> Cc: hybi@ietf.org; avt@ietf.org; fecframe@ietf.org; ietf-http-wg@w3.org
> Subject: Re: [AVT] Fw: [httpstreaming] Agenda and Slides
> 
> 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.

-acbegen