Re: [MMUSIC] Martin Duke's Discuss on draft-ietf-mmusic-t140-usage-data-channel-12: (with DISCUSS and COMMENT)

[Paul Kyzivat <[e-mail]>]

On 4/6/20 5:08 PM, Christer Holmberg wrote:

> So, first, the suggestion is to *remove* the following paragraph from 
> Section 4.2.1:
> 
> "If an endpoint receives text at a higher rate than it can handle,
> 
> e.g., because the sending endpoint does not support the 'cps'
> 
> attribute parameter, the receiving endpoint can indicate to the
> 
> sending endpoint that it is not willing to receive more text at the
> 
> moment, using the direction attributes (Section 4.2.3)."
> 
> Then, do we really need to add anything to 4.2.3.4? If we do, we will 
> still end up with the does-the-remote-peer-buffer question. Could we 
> just leave 4.2.3.4 as it is?

I think it depends on what the intent was of that paragraph. The current 
discussion seems to take it to mean that an endpoint that is being 
overwhelmed by excess incoming text might change the direction to 
sendonly in order to *throttle* the sender while it catches up. I'm 
inclined to agree with you that this is an inappropriate technique.

An alternative interpretation is that in such a case the overwhelmed 
receiver may change the direction to sendonly in order to permanently 
silence the misbehaving sender. I have no problem with that.

	Thanks,
	Paul