Re: [MMUSIC] Simulcast: Short timelines, draft impending

[Flemming Andreasen <[e-mail]>]

Thank you for submitting the draft. Will there be an update to the 
simulcast draft as well before the Interim meeting next week ?

-- Flemming

On 10/2/15 6:48 PM, Suhas Nandakumar wrote:
> Hello All
>
>    As indicated by Adam in his email , we have submitted the draft 
> defining "RID".
>
>    The draft can be found here: 
> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-pthatcher-mmusic-rid/?include_text=1
>
>    Please provide your feedback on the same.
>
> Thanks
> Suhas
>
> On Thu, Sep 24, 2015 at 7:34 PM, Adam Roach <[e-mail] 
> <mailto:[e-mail]>> wrote:
>
>     At the W3C WebRTC interim meeting a couple of weeks ago, one of
>     the issues that the group was not able to resolve was how to
>     enable the use of simulcast for WebRTC browser implementations. A
>     key point of contention was the use of unique payload types for
>     each simulcast encoding in the current MMUSIC document
>     (draft-ietf-mmusic-sdp-simulcast-01). Combined with the other
>     features planned for WebRTC, there is concern that such an
>     approach may lead to PT exhaustion within a session under certain
>     reasonably expected circumstances.
>
>
>     As important context: the WebRTC 1.0 specification is rapidly
>     approaching finalization, and the working group hopes to leave the
>     TPAC meeting at the end of October with all of the loose ends tied
>     up. Simulcast is one of the more important and one of the most
>     loose ends in the specification at the moment. As a result, we
>     sincerely hope that we can come to consensus on a viable approach
>     in MMUSIC over the next few weeks. To be explicit: the TPAC
>     meeting is the week before the Yokohama IETF meeting, so we cannot
>     afford to wait for the ordinary meeting-driven work schedule to
>     push simulcast along. We hope to foster a useful and productive
>     conversation on the mailing list well ahead of IETF 94.
>
>
>     While there were some “hallway discussions” in Prague to discuss
>     potential approaches that would address these concerns, none of
>     these have yet been documented and shared with the mailing list.
>
>
>     After significant conversations both at and after the interim
>     WebRTC meeting, and considering information about the type of
>     solutions that interested parties are likely to find acceptable, a
>     number of the WebRTC participants have come up with a tentative
>     proposal that we believe is likely to be simple, flexible, and
>     satisfactory to everyone involved. At a high level:
>
>
>      *
>
>        The current behavior described in the MMUSIC simulcast draft
>     remains
>        valid.
>
>      *
>
>        Additionally, we define a new attribute type (provisionally called
>        “RID”, for “RTP Stream ID”) that can be used to define additional
>        codec-independent constraints on PTs (e.g., max-fps, max-bps,
>        max-width, max-height).
>
>      *
>
>        RIDs can be defined to be unidirectional, so as to allow
>        implementations to signal the ability to send a different number of
>        encodings than they can receive.
>
>      *
>
>        The values for each constraint can be specified to be different in
>        each direction.
>
>      *
>
>        When used, the RID value is encoded as part of the RTP packet,
>     in an
>        extension header.
>
>      *
>
>        The values (that is, identifiers) used for RID are proposed by the
>        offerer in a session, and are symmetric. The RID values in an
>     answer
>        must be a subset of those present in the offer.
>
>      *
>
>        The parameters associated with a RID can be made more restrictive
>        (i.e., resolution decreased, bandwidth decreased), but not less
>        restrictive, in an answer.
>
>      *
>
>        For those sessions that use RIDs, the “a=simulcast” parameter is
>        enhanced to be able to carry RIDs instead of PTs.
>
>
>     We hope to have an internet-draft that describes this approach in
>     more detail by the end of next week.
>
>     /a
>
>     _______________________________________________
>     mmusic mailing list
>     [e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]>
>     https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mmusic
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> mmusic mailing list
> [e-mail]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mmusic