RE: WG Last Call on Internet Multimedia Conferencing Architecture

Roni Even <Roni_e@accord.co.il> Tue, 21 November 2000 12:16 UTC

Return-Path: <owner-confctrl>
Received: by zephyr.isi.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) id EAA18941 for confctrl-outgoing; Tue, 21 Nov 2000 04:16:46 -0800 (PST)
Received: from gamma.isi.edu (gamma.isi.edu [128.9.144.145]) by zephyr.isi.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id EAA18936 for <confctrl@zephyr.isi.edu>; Tue, 21 Nov 2000 04:16:45 -0800 (PST)
Received: from accord-ntsrv3.accord.co.il ([199.203.164.5]) by gamma.isi.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id EAA23474; Tue, 21 Nov 2000 04:16:41 -0800 (PST)
Received: by accord-ntsrv3.accord.co.il with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2448.0) id <WPXY9CFK>; Tue, 21 Nov 2000 14:16:01 +0200
Message-ID: <F1E2C32A0731D211A5E900805F6526BD7D1E42@accord-ntsrv3.accord.co.il>
From: Roni Even <Roni_e@accord.co.il>
To: 'Joerg Ott' <jo@tzi.uni-bremen.de>, confctrl@ISI.EDU
Cc: csp@ISI.EDU, mankin@ISI.EDU, sob@harvard.edu
Subject: RE: WG Last Call on Internet Multimedia Conferencing Architecture
Date: Tue, 21 Nov 2000 14:16:01 +0200
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2448.0)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1252"
Sender: owner-confctrl@zephyr.isi.edu
Precedence: bulk

Hi,
I read the document and found it very interesting. I have a couple of
questions that maybe you can clarify for me. My interest in in a multipoint
cases.

1. H.332 is scaling H.323 conference size by having participants who are
listener only. I understand that light-weight session are for participants
who can send and receive video. It is not clear to me how this architecture
scales. I did not see any central control that will authorize transmitting
on the multicast channel, does that mean that anyone can send its video and
audio streams at all time. 
2. The conference communication mode according to my understanding is
layered video and some audio, how does a participant know which codec he has
to use to join the conference.
3. Who is mixing the audio or does each participant need to mix the incoming
audio streams, does he choose one, how?
4. What about video mixing.
5. In video conferencing the codec may lose synchronization with the video
stream and would like to ask for fast update, will it be in the rtcp stream,
how many such messages do you expect in the case of many to many.
6. There are new H.263 annexes that enable better quality video by using
back channel mechanisms, those are done in H.245. How are those going to be
handled without a central control.

Thanks
Roni Even

********************************
Roni Even
VP Product Planning
Accord Networks
Phone: +972-3-9251200
Fax: +972-3-9211571
email: roni_e@accord.co.il


-----Original Message-----
From: Joerg Ott [mailto:jo@tzi.uni-bremen.de]
Sent: Monday, November 13, 2000 10:23 PM
To: confctrl@ISI.EDU
Cc: csp@ISI.EDU; mankin@ISI.EDU; sob@harvard.edu
Subject: WG Last Call on Internet Multimedia Conferencing Architecture


Folks,

we would like to issue WG Last Call on 

    draft-ietf-mmusic-confarch-03.txt

for Informational RFC.

The Last Call is to expire in two weeks from now, on 27 November 2000.

If no major problems are found in the document, we will then send it
off to the IESG.

Cheers,
Colin & Joerg